The Vaccine Truthers: why parents shun life-saving shots

A new generation of parents are refusing to vaccinate their kids. They’re convinced the shots are far more dangerous than the diseases they’re meant to prevent, and they’re willing to become social pariahs to prove it

Jennifer is a 30-year-old store manager in Georgetown who agreed to talk to me if I withheld her last name. She dresses plainly, rarely wears makeup and follows what she calls a green lifestyle, eschewing drugs and chemicals in any form, taking homeopathic remedies when she’s sick and observing a strict vegetarian diet. She met her husband, Frank, an independent contractor, in 2008. In 2011, she gave birth to their daughter, Franca, at home in a bathtub.

Jennifer was adamant that Franca not be vaccinated. As a teen, she had a bad reaction to a flu shot that kept her in bed for a month. In her 20s, she read horror stories about parents whose children had adverse reactions to routine vaccines that contained things like mercury and formaldehyde.

Five months after Franca was born, her parents divorced. Frank only agreed to give Jennifer custody if she had their daughter vaccinated. So, in late 2012, Jennifer reluctantly took Franca, then 10 months old, for her first round. Jennifer says Franca developed cold and flu symptoms within hours, picking at her ears incessantly. Then, after Franca’s second and third sets of immunizations at 18 months, Jennifer thought she noticed her daughter’s speech and mobility development regressing.

She blamed the vaccines, though her doctor vehemently disagreed with her. She asked a homeopath to perform a metal test on Franca. When it came back showing high mercury content in Franca’s blood and urine, Jennifer confronted her GP, who told her it was only one spike and that it could have been caused by something Franca had eaten. Jennifer, unconvinced, has sworn she won’t allow her daughter to be injected with any more chemicals and persuaded Frank it’s in the child’s best interest. But her extended family is furious with her, saying she’s risking Franca’s safety and their own. Though Franca’s next set of vaccinations isn’t due until she turns four, Jennifer’s sister and mother have told her that the moment Franca misses a vaccination is the moment she can’t be around her cousins. Her daycare centre has also warned her that Franca won’t be welcome.

None of this has shaken Jennifer’s resolve—she’s convinced she’s right to avoid vaccines, and she’s not alone. A recent Ontario Ministry of Health survey concluded that roughly half of young moms have serious concerns about vaccines. Meanwhile, pro-vaccination parents understandably don’t want their kids exposed. “Vaccination is the segregation issue of our time,” Jennifer told me. “It’s not about blacks and whites anymore. It’s about the people who vaccinate and the people who don’t.”

When it comes to world-altering advances, vaccines are right up there with clean water and antibiotics. Children and adults in Ontario now receive vaccines against pneumococcus disease, the flu, diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis, polio, rotavirus, measles, mumps, rubella, varicella, hepatitis B, meningitis and HPV. Nearly anything that once caused devastating childhood disease and death is now preventable.

And yet many of the gains of the last century are in jeopardy. In March 2013, Toronto Public Health investigated an outbreak of measles. Two siblings aged 18 months and three years contracted the virus and passed it on to three other unvaccinated kids in their daycare (two of the five required hospitalization). The siblings’ parents hadn’t vaccinated them because they feared that the MMR shot could cause autism, a myth that has been unequivocally debunked. Then, last February, a one-year-old who’d travelled to the Philippines in the midst of a widespread measles outbreak returned with the virus. There have been 21 measles cases in Ontario so far this year, an alarming number for a once nearly eradicated illness. Measles generally lasts two to three weeks, causing high fever and a severe full-body rash, but it can lead to pneumonia and encephalitis, miscarriage and childhood death. It’s also extremely contagious: before the measles vaccine, a single case could cause an outbreak that would sweep an entire school.

For a vaccine to be considered successful, 95 per cent of the population must comply. Less than half the schools in the GTA meet the ideal immunity rate. According to Toronto Public Health figures, at Alpha Alternative Junior, a downtown elementary school where students aren’t graded, less than 45 per cent of children were vaccinated in 2011–2012.

In a way, vaccination is a victim of its own success. New parents only know polio from history books, and they’ve heard vaccines can cause autoimmune disorders, seizures, developmental delays, paralysis and of course, the biggie, autism. Even if the number of instances is infinitesimal or the evidence is discredited, these parents won’t take a risk on their kids. To them, the side effects sound scarier than the vaccine-preventable illnesses. In our go-natural, eat-clean, consume-organic world, it’s getting harder to convince parents to inject perfectly healthy babies with a cocktail of medical ingredients they can’t pronounce. The same anti-establishment impulse that causes people to question the safety of GMO foods fuels their fear of immunization.

An Aurora nutritionist named Sue Skillins told me she’s long believed better sanitation practices, clean water and natural immunities are enough to keep her children—now 21 and 25—safe from diseases. Another Toronto mother and holistic therapist, Heather Fraser, chose not to vaccinate her second child after her eldest had an adverse reaction. (She’s since written a book in which she argues there’s a link between vaccines and peanut allergies.) I spoke to one mom who told me she hopes her 12-year-old daughter, who has never been vaccinated, will get measles—both to prove to the pro-vaccination camp that it isn’t so bad, and also so that she’ll have lifelong natural immunity.

Parents who refuse to vaccinate their kids complain of being turned away from schools, left off birthday party lists and sneered at by neighbours. One mother of an unvaccinated child who attends an alternative school is so afraid of being ostracized, she would only let me interview her through a third-party email address.

Another mother, a 40-year-old women’s health advocate and front-line community worker with the City of Toronto named Michelle, has two unvaccinated daughters, ages 11 and seven. Four years ago, both of them caught pertussis, a vaccine-­preventable disease more commonly known as whooping cough. If anything, it only strengthened her decision not to vaccinate: while it was tough to see her kids so sick, both rebounded, and she believes the episode will give them a stronger immunity than the manufactured immunity vaccines provide. Michelle says she doesn’t engage with anyone who’d criticize her for her choices. She has surrounded herself with a cocoon of parents who also avoid vaccines. Her youngest daughter is home-schooled, and her eldest attends a Toronto alternative school, where the choice is accepted.

Ananda More, a 38-year-old homeopath, reiki practitioner and doula who runs a clinic in Riverdale, has an unvaccinated six-year-old daughter. Although her husband and extended family back her decision, she’s encountered her share of criticism. “It was extremely difficult to find a GP who supported my decision,” she says. More is making a documentary about the effectiveness of alternative therapies like nosodes—mixtures usually made from infected saliva, pus or feces, then diluted with alcohol or water until they are harmless.

Pointing to anecdotal evidence and studies published in small journals, the homeopathic movement claims nosodes can be just as effective as traditional vaccines, and safer because they contain no additives. But there is nothing in the way of credible scientific studies to confirm their safety or efficacy. Health Canada has approved about 150 nosode products for sale, although it requires all of them to carry labels stating they are not intended as an alternative to traditional vaccines.

It’s tempting to write off the anti-vaccine crusaders as a granola-crunching lunatic fringe, but opposition isn’t a new phenomenon. Vaccines have confronted naysayers since they were first introduced to fight smallpox in 1798. In 1885, in response to a smallpox epidemic, the Ontario government enforced immunization at three months after birth, then again every seven years. More importantly, it empowered school boards to demand each pupil present a vaccination certificate to stay enrolled. The Toronto school board implemented this requirement in 1894, and immediately faced a city-wide protest. In 1900, politicians, labourers, homeopaths, businessmen and even a few doctors banded together to form the Anti-Vaccination League of Canada. Its mission: to repeal all ­compulsory vaccination laws. To them, vaccinations seemed alien and unsafe—they balked at being forced to receive them, believing it encroached on their individual rights.

Six years later, after extensive media coverage, the league presented a petition to the school board demanding the law be rescinded. It contended smallpox vaccines were “a ploy to avoid more expensive sanitary measures,” like clean water and better disposal of human waste, and questioned the logic of ­forcing inoculation on a healthy population. Members complained that the vaccine’s alleged side effects—cancer, blindness, ulcers, abscesses—were worse than smallpox itself. Back then, unsanitary vaccine practices, including the use of unclean needles and improper care of injection wounds, did cause some of those things. Many of the working poor preferred to take their chances with smallpox.

Public sentiment against vaccines won out until 1919, when Toronto’s medical officer of health, Charles Hastings, reinstated the compulsory vaccinations for schoolchildren. He called people against vaccines in Toronto “ignoramuses.” The secretary of the provincial board of health added that the anti-vaccine camp “is not worth any intelligent man’s considering for a moment.” The debate raged throughout the 1920s, but as more vaccinations were enforced, smallpox rates dwindled (it was declared eradicated in 1980), and the anti-vaccination movement faded.

For a little while, at least. In the 1980s, controversy around vaccines flared again, centred on the vaccines against whooping cough, diphtheria, tetanus and polio, following a high-profile U.S. documentary that claimed vaccines caused brain damage in children. In 1982, in an effort to raise the immunization rate, the Ontario government passed An Act to Protect the Health of Pupils in Schools (later renamed the Immunization of School Pupils Act) authorizing the suspension of any students who couldn’t prove they were fully immunized. Soon after, a small group of Ontario parents formed the Committee Against Compulsory Vaccination. It lobbied the government for two years, eventually convincing politicians that the forced intake of medications violated the recently entrenched Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The committee secured an amendment to the act, guaranteeing exemption based on religious and conscientious choice not to vaccinate. In other words, parents who sincerely believed vaccines would harm their children didn’t have to immunize, and their children could not be suspended from school.

The province, concerned about the recent spike in rare ­illnesses like measles and undeterred by the anti-vaccine ­lobbyists, has expanded the act to cover even more vaccines. Starting this month, students must now also show proof of vaccination for meningococcal disease and whooping cough, in ­addition to tetanus, diphtheria, polio and mumps. Kids born in 2010 or later must also show proof of chickenpox vaccine or face suspension. Parents will have a year-long grace period to get their children’s records in order.

Yvonne Armstrong started campaigning against school shots after her daughter, Kaitlyn, received the HPV vaccine

Parents whose kids have bad experiences with vaccines—a small minority—often become lifelong activists, determined to convert other parents to their anti-vaccine philosophy. Edda West, a co-founder of the Committee Against Compulsory Vaccination, first became suspicious about vaccines in 1977, when her youngest child contracted measles after receiving the MMR shot. She went on to help found the national Vaccine Risk Awareness Network for parents who consider their child vaccine damaged—a conclusion often based on their own research but also sometimes on a homeopath’s diagnosis. Now a stick-thin, silver-haired 70-year-old, she spends her days as a “risk educator” for VRAN. She gathers evidence disproving the safety and efficacy of vaccines. Her organization counts a couple of hundred members, from young parents to grandparents.

Yvonne Armstrong became an anti-vaccine activist after her daughter, Kaitlyn, received the Gardasil vaccine at school in 2010. Yvonne and her husband, Mark, live with their four children in a large white house with a double-car garage on a quiet street in Brooklin, a small town north of Whitby. They’re unlikely activists: Yvonne is a former Toronto cop who currently teaches part-time for Durham College’s police foundations program and competes in bodybuilding contests. Mark is a SWAT sergeant with the Toronto police.

Kaitlyn experienced extreme pains immediately after her first of three ­Gardasil shots for HPV, the number-one cause of cervical cancer. Public and Catholic schools across the province administer the vaccine to girls over the span of the Grade 8 school year. Yvonne assumed her daughter’s pain was related to her intense schedule of soccer, dance, and track and field. A tough-love kind of mom, she told Kaitlyn to take an Advil and suck it up. After Kaitlyn received the third shot in April, her joints became stiffer and stiffer, like she was filled with slow-drying cement. Eventually, the pain became so encompassing she could barely walk. Yvonne would lay her down on the living room floor and pack her in ice, head to toe.

Test after test—for cancer, juvenile arthritis, celiac disease, Lyme disease, lupus, everything—came back negative, until Kaitlyn went for a round of testing at SickKids in February 2012 and was diagnosed with fibromyalgia, an incurable condition that could mean a lifetime of musculoskeletal pain and fatigue. At the suggestion of a friend, Yvonne made an appointment for Kaitlyn with a naturopath-chiropractor, who asked if she’d had any recent vaccines. He then started listing off the ingredients in Gardasil, including aluminum, and Yvonne felt her stomach drop. Kaitlyn is severely allergic to metal—ever since she was a baby, if any type other than gold or silver touched her skin, she’d react with swelling and rashes. What, Yvonne wondered, would happen if something containing aluminum were injected into Kaitlyn? Could it be responsible for her spiral into illness and pain?

The answers were mixed. Aluminum is used in Gardasil as an adjuvant, as it is in many vaccines, to enhance and strengthen a person’s immune response. Immunize Canada, a ­coalition composed primarily of medical associations that promotes the use of vaccines, stresses aluminum is present in baby formula and even a mother’s breast milk in about the same amount as is found in vaccines. And yet Merck, the maker of Gardasil, warns that people who have had severe allergic reactions to amorphous aluminum hydroxyphosphate sulfate, yeast or polysorbate 80—all used in the vaccine—shouldn’t get the shot.

Yvonne took Kaitlyn to see Paul Jaconello, an MD in Toronto who practises holistic medicine. Like the chiro­practor, he believed Kaitlyn’s pain was a violent autoimmune reaction to Gardasil. For Kaitlyn to get better, he concluded, she’d have to get the metal out of her system using chelation treatment, a strength-sapping therapy most often used in cases of metal poisoning, like uranium, lead or arsenic. Chelation is controversial and not covered by OHIP: while it flushes metal out of the body, it also dumps vital nutrients. Done improperly, it can do more harm than good. The Armstrongs thought it was worth the risk. After the fifth treatment, Kaitlyn walked up the stairs at her house, alternating feet, for the first time in months.

Yvonne decided other parents needed to hear what happened to her daughter. Throughout the 2013 school year, she visited school boards across the GTA, sharing a PowerPoint presentation that described Kaitlyn’s ordeal—the mystery illness, the Eureka moment and the return to health. After each presentation, she implored the school board to include Gardasil’s product warnings in permission forms and to encourage parents to consult a doctor. Her principal goal is to convince officials to move the vaccine out of schools—where it has become just one more permission form, an automatic yes, like for pizza day or the zoo—and into the doctor’s office, where, ideally, a parent has the opportunity to ask for more information. While she believes parents and kids should have access to the vaccine if they want it, she also thinks they’re now woefully under-informed.

Yvonne’s presentations have not always gone well. Her request can seem both small and sensible, but the health care field is extremely hesitant to draw more attention to the potential risks of vaccines. The fear is that people will do exactly what Yvonne wants them to: use her daughter’s bad reaction as a universal lesson for all parents. What Yvonne views as preventative education, doctors see as scaremongering. Some health care professionals refuse to believe the vaccine could be harmful. At one presentation, a team of medical researchers from McMaster University told the school board Gardasil likely didn’t cause what happened to Kaitlyn. One doctor who attended Yvonne’s presentation found her on Facebook and accused her of irresponsibly campaigning to rid schools of all vaccines.

Yvonne’s PowerPoint pushes a lot of emotional buttons. Sometimes, a school trustee will cry. They see a girl who underwent drastic change, who lost two years of her life to a debilitating condition, and it breaks their hearts. Kaitlyn’s story is affecting in a way cold logic isn’t, her experiences infinitely shareable and memorable—a major part of the anti-vaccine movement’s traction.

Last February, in an attempt to persuade parents of the safety of vaccines, Public Health Ontario released a comprehensive report on adverse events following immunization, what they term AEFIs. “Improved communication,” it says, “will contribute to restoring confidence and building trust in the vaccine system.” The report reveals that of 7.8 million doses of vaccine administered in the province in 2012, 765 people claimed to have experienced an AEFI. Of those AEFIs reported, doctors determined 134 were clearly linked to another medical cause and therefore unsubstantiated, leaving 631 cases of confirmed bad reactions. Few—56 of the 631—were deemed serious. Nineteen of the cases deemed serious involved children who required hospital stays. There were no reports of death. Much more commonly, people experienced injection site reactions (pain, swelling, abscess), rashes or fevers—reactions that are unpleasant but don’t last.

There have been calls to implement a no-fault compensation system in Ontario for people who’ve suffered adverse ­reactions—something that exists in many other places around the world. Such a system was introduced in the U.S. when many drug companies stopped making vaccines following a flurry of high-price payouts. Under it, vaccine manufacturers can’t be held financially responsible. In other words, it’s a way to maintain the integrity of the vaccine system while also helping those who’ve suffered serious reactions after vaccination.

This summer, Jennifer, the woman who ­vaccinated her daughter to get custody, took Franca, now three years old, to be assessed at ErinoakKids, the largest treatment centre for children with disabilities in Ontario. Though the doctors couldn’t trace the cause of Franca’s disability, they did diagnose her with developmental delay, including a severe speech and language delay. When she is 10, Franca could be functioning at the level of a six-year-old, or younger. To supplement the ErinoakKids’ therapy, Jennifer started Franca on a detox of organic foods and Epsom salt baths.

Franca’s diagnosis has only reaffirmed Jennifer’s fear of vaccines. She doesn’t care if her family shuns her, if she’s kicked out of daycare, if the rest of the world calls her crazy. Her main concern, she tells me, is to do no more harm to her daughter.

She still plans to protect Franca from disease: she advocates that chemically based vaccines be replaced with homeopathic versions. The last thing Jennifer would want, she says, is for society to slide back to what things were like when little protection existed and hundreds of thousands died.

The question of vaccination is a question of risk management. People do have adverse reactions to vaccinations, but it is very rare. One is far more likely to cause harm to their child by placing them in a car then getting them vaccinated, yet the perception is opposite.

“I spoke to one mom who told me she hopes her 12-year-old daughter, who has never been vaccinated, will get measles—both to prove to the pro-vaccination camp that it isn’t so bad, and also so that she’ll have lifelong natural immunity.”

This is part of the problem: people simply don’t understand what constitutes scientific proof. Yes, if her daughter gets measles, she will PROBABLY be fine once the disease has run its course; measles has a morbidity rate of only 1-2 per 1000. But that doesn’t “prove” anything; it is always dangerous to generalize from the specific to the general, and never more so when you are talking about statistically low probabilities. People treat their personal experiences like absolutes, and that’s just terrible, terrible science. It is all about the numbers. In 2012, according to WHO data, 122,000 people worldwide died from measles, mostly children under the age of five. I’d like these anti-vaxers to have to look all those parents in the eye and tell them that measles “isn’t so bad”.

Getting past that, though, why in the name of all that is good and holy would you expose your child to even a 1 in 1000 chance of dying just to make a point?!? Forget being a “social pariah” — that’s just being a lousy parent. Even if her daughter doesn’t die or have any lingering effects, measles is a terrible disease to experience. I can’t even imagine DESIRING my child to go through that.

So she won’t vaccinate her children but will feed them pus and feces as. Alternative “medicine”? This is Darwin’s theory at work. Those too stupid to get their children vaccinated will see their offspring die before they can procreate.

It seems to me that many who object to vaccines are concerned with the heavy metals in the formula and not the science behind vaccines in general. It’s a lot easier to claim parents are misguided because they don’t believe in the efficacy of vaccines but can you say the same for parents that don’t want their children injected with mercury and aluminum? Expert opinion can be slow to evolve. I clearly remember the scoffing from my dentist in ’92 when I asked for a filling without mercury.

People in the media continue to push the agenda of the vaccine industry and the CDC without doing due diligence to researching vaccines. Not once has the media provided a gold standard study on the safety and effectiveness of any vaccines. An INDEPENDENT study, not one juiced up by the vaccine/CDC industry like the one reported on in July of this year. Every MSM outlet was raving about that study until people actually read it and the first thing that pop out was it was done by a think tank for the government which has done studies for the vaccine industry for years. Conflict of interest, the study omitted large sections of data without explanation and the most glaring is comparing the MMR in this country to the Japanese one which is comparing apples to oranges. I’ve not seen one medical reporter on any MSM site analyze that study. You don’t hear much now because it, like the MMR study from 2004 that been talked about since the 18 of this month, is bias and poorly done.

I don’t know about most people but with the CDC’s record and the billions the vaccine industry has paid in criminal fines over the years, do you really want to have them inject something into your child or yourself? Especially since they have never proven scientifically the stuff is safe or effective.

This is the American Medical Association’s position on informed consent. The key point is ‘he or she can make an informed decision to proceed or to refuse a particular course of medical intervention.’ Please notice the word refuse. It is our right to refuse ‘a particular course of medical intervention.’ Notice it doesn’t say ‘except vaccination.’ Informed consent is the backbone of medical ethics. You have the right to say no. Doctors who assert that you do not have a choice about vaccines are violating this medical code of ethics. Vaccination choice is a human right.

Well, then the vaccine won’t be as effective. It won’t protect our children against disease.

Additives like formaldehyde?

Well, then there’s the risk that the virus (or bacteria) hasn’t been inactivated or killed. Then there’s the risk we’re GIVING the full blown, virulent disease to our children.

Additives like thimerosal?

Thimerosal is only found in the multi-dose vials of the influenza vaccine. It’s there to prevent bacterial contamination of the vial from as each vaccine is drawn from it. The single dose syringes have no thimerosal in them, whatsoever.

Want them to remove thimerosal from the multidose vials? I sure don’t – remember the folks who died from the compounding pharmacy scandal? The compounding pharmacy never added a preservative to its vials – which allowed bacteria to contaminate them.

It’s strange to me that the “pro-vax” parents are freaking out about the unvaccinated kids. I mean, if these vaccines are truly as effective as the drug companies would have us believe, their kids are immune. The vaccinated kids should be fine, no matter what.
It’s weird.

It’s strange that the ‘anti-vax’ parents still don’t understand the concept that no vaccine is 100% effective.

2 doses of the MMR gives about 99% of the recipients immunity.

Now, let’s talk about ‘Anytown USA’ we’ll say it has a population of 10,000.

If all 10,000 were fully vaccinated, that would mean 9900 were immune to measles, and 100 would be ‘at risk’.

However, because the other 9900 are immune, importation of disease by one of those 9900 isn’t going to happen. That’s how herd immunity works.

Now, let’s say that only 8000 of those 10,000 were fully vaccinated against measles.

That leaves us with 7920 protected individuals in the vaccinated population, and 80 ‘at risk’ – because the vaccine isn’t protecting them.

Suddenly, though, there’s another 2000 ‘at risk’ individuals in their population. This means that importation of measles is HIGHLY likely, since such a large proportion of the population is not protected.

THIS is how unvaccinated children put others at risk. Measles has a 90% attack (infection) rate. If you aren’t immune, and you are exposed, 9 out of 10 will come down with measles.

I do have concerns that there has been no placebo studies done on the effects of adjuvants in vaccines such as aluminium hydroxide,(which is a neurotoxin) formaldehyde known human carcinogen[36] associated with nasal sinus cancer and nasopharyngeal cancer.[37] Recent studies have also shown a positive correlation between exposure to formaldehyde and the development of leukemia, particularly myeloid leukemia.[38][39] (Wiki) albumin, gelatin, lactose, neomycin, chick embryo, chicken egg, duck egg calf (bovine) serum. human diploid cells. There have been no retrospective studies done between vaccinated and non vaccinated children even though this would not be a difficult study to do as there is now a large unvaccinated population. With the growing number of children suffering from allergies and autoimmune disease parents have a right to question. In particular parents have the right to question aluminium in vaccines as there is science out there which says it is not safe. I would appreciate some answers to my questions above. http://www.meerwetenoverfreek.nl/images/stories/Tomljenovic_Shaw-CMC-published.pdf

Okay, so metal additives are the lesser risk for the population, if not
the individual. But, is anyone trying to reduce the use of additives
with other methods? No, of course not. Admitting any shortcoming would
threaten compliance, (not to mention, have financial implications).
Better to deem the vaccines safe as-is and label questions and
objections as uninformed silliness.

There is no such thing as “alternative” medicine. Medicine either works or doesn’t. The Analogy is alternative gravity…. there is no such thing! This woman and others like her is putting others at risk…. look at polio and whooping cough that is making a comeback in areas where anti-vaccine zealists exist

Your conclusion is nothing but your hypothesis. Your comment has nothing to do with science. And even if some women have a tendency to “believe” in the anti-vaccine it doesn’t make them less educated. These are conclusions you have deduced with the little information you’ve been given. It’s very unfair to generalize that to the whole population of women.

What few people understand is that a placebo group is not used when assessing the safety of a vaccine. Any vaccine. Instead, results are compared with studies from previous vaccines. If approximately the same (acceptable) number of deaths occur then the vaccine is deemed safe. The time for willful ignorance is over. Pharmaceutical companies are not liable for any injuries resulting from the drugs they sell, however, if any individual were to give a child a cocktail of formaldehyde, aluminum or mercury to drink that person would face criminal charges. The above ingredients are all known neurotoxins and no amount is deemed safe for humans by any governing body – except in the form of a vaccine. The herd immunity assertion can not be used when discussing vaccination either. Life time immunity is only conferred from contracting the disease. Vaccines protection last for a finite period of time. By the time vaccinated children are adults they are at a greater risk from these childhood diseases as these diseases are more dangerous for adults than children. Is that the grand plan? Condemning our children to injections of neurotoxins for the rest of their lives? Billions of dollars are at stake. Does anyone really believe that pharmaceutical companies have our interests at heart?

Refuting well researched and demonstrated science is ignorance plain and simple, as ignorant as believing that prayer will save you, and operating as such – especially when it comes to public health – is dangerous to the public. When you deny something because it does not mesh with your ideology, it is ignorance – whether it is evolution, vaccines, ect.

In terms of education, as studies have shown, the core sciences are still not being pursued by girls as much as their counterparts. If you lack an understanding in math and science, you are lacking a part of education.

If I were illiterate, could not read or write, or very weak at language or reading,it would not be tolerated, and is viewed as unacceptable and is a stigma; yet we turn the other way when people are are weak in math and sciences, saying “oh, so and so is just not good at math”. Would you ever expect to hear someone say “oh, so so and so is just not good at reading”?

The increased incidence of those two types of cancer are in mortuary workers, and other industrial workers who are exposed to formaldehyde in the workplace.

Furthermore, your body produces formaldehyde as a byproduct of 1 carbon metabolism. An average adult will produce 55,000 milligrams of it each day. A 2 month old baby has, on average, 9000 micrograms of it in the blood & body water.

How will 100 micrograms from a vaccine suddenly be an overload to the system?

The study you wish to be done cannot be done – because of bias introduced by the anti-vaccine parent. Treatment of illness without diagnosis from a qualified physician, etc.

The vaccines are tested with and without adjuvants. The rest of those things are just what couldn’t be purified out after growing and inactivating the virus or toxin. Allergies and autoimmune disorders are well correlated with sanitation. There are aluminum salts in vaccines there is no elemental aluminum.

Vaccines have a lot less adjuvants, antigens, preservatives, proteins to cause allergic reactions, and contaminants from manufacture than they ever did because we are constantly improving purification techniques. So, yes someone cares and have been thinking about.

I don’t think it’s because girls are less focused on science than boys, as much as it is that we still expect mothers to do much of the heavy lifting when it comes to child care and the decision-making around that. Many of the ‘crunchy’ parenting ideas focus largely on intuition and ‘other ways of knowing’, and constantly reinforce the idea that a mother knows what’s best for her child. If you go back thirty or so years, much of the writing for new and expectant moms was telling them that they could and should advocate for their children’s health, that they knew their babies better than the doctor did (which is probably true), and if they thought something was wrong they should make sure it didn’t get brushed off. Some of that grew out of a need to push back against a paternalistic medical system.
Move that forward, add in a good bit of relative thinking and a strong dose of the recent push toward ‘organic’ and ‘natural’, and you have a community that tells mothers that their instincts are infallible and that their feelings are just a valid as any study. The former head of the Australian Vaccination Network has said that one anecdote is better than 1000 studies. What started as, “You know your own baby’s habits and behavior” has become “You know more about everything related to your child.”

Research is ongoing into safer vaccines. In addition, the ‘additives’ you object to are also a lesser risk for the individual. Everything Linda mentioned means the individual dose of vaccine is safer for the person receiving it.
Making each dose of the vaccine more effective means that fewer doses are needed and there’s less risk of disease. To the individual.
Making sure the viruses or bacteria have been inactivated means there’s less risk of getting a dose of the full-blown disease. For the individual.
Making sure that multi-dose vials are kept free of bacterial contamination means that each dose is safer. For the individual.
I know it’s hard to give up your preconceived ideas when confronted with facts, but you should try. You seem to be working really hard to fit everything into your idea that vaccine manufacturers are endangering people for profit. Shown that it isn’t so, you twist into a slightly different way of saying the same thing.

That was an excellent synthesis, and I agree with your assertion that “intuition” and “feeling” has become a substitute for reasoning, but i still believe it is part and parcel with a focus on “feel” vs “know”.

What do you think can be done moving forward? How much influence do you think industries play on this attitude?
What should doctors, nurses and health care practitioners be doing to supply information that is accessible?

What’s also weird is her lack of compassion. It’s not just my vaccinated children I’m concerned about. It’s all those others who will be put at risk – the very young, the very old, those with compromised immunity, even the unvaccinated children of antivaccine parents, who are vulnerable to serious disease because of their parents’ willingness to put instinct and feeling ahead of evidence and fact.

Nobody said you didn’t have the right. Well, the Supreme Court did, but that’s another discussion. What we’re talking about is why exercising your ‘right’ to refuse vaccination for your children is dangerous and foolish. You having the right to make that choice doesn’t mean it’s a good choice to make.

You don’t see independent studies because you don’t look for them. There are thousands that have been done on various aspects of vaccines, vaccination, immunology related to vaccination, etc. You just dismiss them all because you don’t want to have to see what they say.

“however, if any individual were to give a child a cocktail of formaldehyde, aluminum or mercury to drink that person would face criminal charges.”
That has to be one of the dumbest arguments anyone has come up with so far. One, if any untrained individual were to throw together a couple of wheels and a box and take your child out on the highway in it, they might face criminal charges, too.
Two, if they gave the child those ingredients to drink (well, absent the mercury since there isn’t any in vaccines. When do you plan to move into this decade?), in the few drops that make up a vaccine dose, the child wouldn’t even notice.

“no amount is deemed safe for humans by any governing body”
I won’t say this one is stupid. It’s just wrong. Got anything to support this?

Not to mention that it’s a moot point, as it isn’t used in the vaccines children get.
I always wonder why people keep bringing it up. It’s like telling us we should be concerned about all the lead being added to gasoline here in the U.S.

I wish I knew. I think moving toward more general equality for girls and women is part and parcel of it. I know that some of it stems from women’s need to be more in control of their lives and choices, and to make their contributions matter more. We definitely need to encourage more STEM education and careers for females, partly for their own sake and partly so that women can be seen more as rational, logical people.
I don’t know what to do about the general slide toward ‘alternative’ opinions about science and medicine. Keep pushing back, I suppose, with information aimed at and available to the general population. Keep getting it out there in front of people.
From what I can tell, there are several threads coming together in this, from different directions – things like feminism and women’s empowerment, along with fear of what ‘progress’ has brought on us; pushing back against perceived loss of freedom, and some resentment of governmental control. Add in some very genuine grief over children who are disabled or suffering in some way, and a lot of different lines of fear or concern come together.
Looking back, I wish the CDC and AAP had been more active earlier, but it’s hard to see a need to promote something that looks so obvious and that the vast majority of people already agree with.
I think much of the burden of this is going to fall on the individual health care practitioners. Listen, pay attention, talk to what the real concerns are. Take a serious look at the main AV talking points and come up with good responses that you really understand, not just soundbites. A lot of extra work but it’s a serious problem.
As a group, push to get the AV attitude and opinion out of health care work. Mandatory vaccination for nurses and those who work with patients. Required continuing education. I hate to sound like one of ‘them’ but I think the shift is already happening, and it should be encouraged to continue.
The rest of us can do the same thing when opportunities come up, along with keeping the positive message out in front of people. I think some of it’s going to involve pushing fringe opinions out of center stage. We don’t give equal time to flat-earthers.
Sorry about the speech, but you did ask. :)

No I appreciate the time you took to write it and it was very well thought out (and points out some things i didn’t initially consider to be major factors). I agree with you, in particular about the last point. Fringe messages (good or bad) are much less “fringe” these days because of media, commenting and forums, and social networks. The messages aren’t always accurate and people need to be very careful.

Measels in Scotland she contracted in the 50s damaged her eyes. She had glasses as a result of this.
I can’t believe someone would say that unless they are totally ignorant to the risks and do not understand in any real depth the problems and complications that can arise.

Measels can kill, even in 1st world countries with adequate medical coverage. If you are one of the 3 cases in 1000 where complications arise and your child dies?

Fine and good, but if you make a decision, you live with the consequences, and some of these consequences will be that you will not be allowed to send your kids to school, day care ect in order for other parents’ children to stay safe. You need to respect that as well.

I welcome open, respectful discussions Chris. Thank you for you comments. The reality is that children die from vaccines. There are risks. To ignore the risks is irresponsible. Read the inserts on the vaccines themselves if you need proof. The National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program was created in 1989 to compensate families of vaccine injured children with tax payers dollars instead of pharmaceutical companies assuming liabilty. SInce its inception it has paid out close to 3 billion dollars to families of vaccine injured children. None of the statements I’ve made are obscure facts that can’t be found from reliable sources should you choose to look.

I don’t really understand the point you are trying to make with the ‘wheel/box’ analogy? Please clarify.

I’m sorry to hear that.
I think that old adage “familiarity breeds contempt” applies here.
The people who are anti-vaccine have their positions because there ARE no sweeping break outs of illness like there were in the 20s and 30s which was a real threat to children and adults.

its easy to say “im not afraid” when the incidence is low (due to everyone’s diligence); it’s entirely different thing saying “I would be willing to expose my child” when the chances of exposure are real and threatening.

Again, shows a real lack of understanding of the mechanics of diseases.

The potential risk associated with residual cell substrate DNA in vaccines prepared in cells that’s required to Produce tumors in 50 percent of the mice, and these numbers are basically comparable.

However, when you compare these to A-549 cells, which is the cells derived from human tumors, it only takes about 1,000 cells to produce tumors for 50 percent of the mice.

Therefore, the A-549 cells are about 1,000 to 10,000-fold more efficient in inducing tumors in animals than are the 293 cells.

Dr. Jim Cook is going to have a lot more to say about tumorigenicity of adenovirus transformed cells later this morning.

The potential risk associated with residual cell substrate DNA in vaccines prepared in designer cells represents another concern. neoplastic cells can contain activated DNA from oncogenes,viral latent oncogenes, the genomes of oncogenic viruses, as well as retrovirus proviruses.viruses, DNA from oncogenic viruses and cloned viral oncogenes can also induce tumors in rodents. Latent viral genomes in retrovirus proviruses sequestered in cell DNA can be infectious.”

Manufacturers have been instructed to ensure the final vaccine contains less than 1 million residual animal cells and the amount of stray DNA is less than 10 ng. per vaccine.[5] These regulations admit that animal DNA is injected into human babies and adults with every shot.

There are all kinds of actions that trained professionals do that are not safe for people with no training and no education to also do. To claim that because it’s unsafe for some random person to stick a bunch of random chemicals into a glass and give it to a child to drink, that means that a highly tested vaccine, manufactured under strict protocols and sanitary conditions, to exhausting standards and administered by a trained professional, is also unsafe, is just silly. About as silly as saying that cars are unsafe to ride in because my soapbox derby vehicle would get creamed on the highway.
You seem to be under the impression that ‘vaccines’ are one singular entity and all the same. The fact is, they differ in level of protection, in how long that immunity lasts, in how your body might react, in terms of sore arms or slight fever or such. To say that they don’t confer longterm immunity is simply not true for several of them, such as measles, varicella, and polio. It’s true that the protection afforded by the pertussis vaccine is comparatively short, but so is that from the disease. They are about 4-12 years and 4-20 years, respectively.

“The above ingredients are all known neurotoxins”
Not in the amounts in vaccines, they aren’t. I have no idea why you included mercury in that list, as you have to know there is none in childhood vaccines and hasn’t been for more than a decade. Even giving you the benefit of the doubt about thimerosal versus elemental mercury. Why did you include it, by the way?
You say that children die from vaccines. Can you show me an instance where that happened? Can you tell me how often it happens, as compared to death rates from preventable diseases? Ignoring the much greater risk from the diseases is what would be irresponsible.

“None of the statements I’ve made are obscure facts that can’t be found from reliable sources should you choose to look.”
I don’t know why you think I haven’t looked already. Antivaxxers always seem to assume that nobody but they have looked into this issue. It’s fairly arrogant, don’t you think?
I’m familiar with the purpose of the VICP. It was set up to compensate people who were injured by vaccines, even as it prevented vaccine manufacturers from simply leaving the market, thereby leaving everyone without the protection of vaccination. With a less stringent standard of evidence (for many things one doesn’t need to prove causation, only temporal association), and a slightly higher percentage of ‘wins’ for plaintiffs than ordinary civil court, the number of cases compensated is still only about .0003% of vaccinations. Hardly representative of a serious danger.

My own daughter has been severely disabled with an autoimmune reaction
which started within minutes of receiving this injection. There had been milder
similar side effects with the first 2 shots but we didn’t recognize them as
side effects because we had been told it is safe. See the Sanevax website for
the full picture.

In the UK death rates of cervical cancer have come down from 8 per 100,000 to 2 per 100,000 over the last 40 years. If this progress continues at the same rate there will be no more deaths in 11 years time without an HPV vaccine.

Why is it AV folks always leave out the pertinent information when they copy/paste?

From your own source:

“The following adverse events have been spontaneously reported during post-approval use of GARDASIL. Because these events were reported voluntarily from a population of uncertain size, it is not possible to reliably estimate their frequency or to establish a causal relationship to vaccine exposure”

youtube vids can be anything at all. [or vimeo, daily motion] it depends what’s in them and what they might link to.
if a provaxer went and recorded someone reading provax lies on video would you dismiss it? i don’t think so!

Why do you accuse me of being AV when my daughter was vaccinated? I’m anti so called health professionals who tell you that the HPV vaccine is safe when it obviously isn’t and then accuse you of Munchausens.

so your anecdote is to be taken seriously but not those of parents with vaccine damaged/dead children?
and just as with vaccination there are many variables. prior health, nutritional status, treatments or lack thereof.
being a nurse is certainly no guarantee as they, and doctors, often follow the silliest doctrines like reducing fever.

it’s easy not to be afraid when you know that between the mildness of the illness and improved sanitation and nutrition an otherwise healthy person has little-no chance of a negative outcome. it also helps to know what to do and to avoid in case of an infection.

This vaccine is given to 12 year olds and is only proven to last for 6 years. It takes 10 – 20 years for cervical cancer to develop so the existing improvements without the vaccine should practically eliminate cervical cancer before any benefits are seen from the vaccine. Those dying of cervical cancer have an average age of 62.

In the meantime there are 92 per 100,000 serious adverse reactions to the HPV vaccine including permanent disabilities and death of TEENAGERS.

This vaccine is only a cash cow for big pharma with NO BENEFITS at all to its recipients.

HPV is common. Most people have the virus at some time in their lives. For most people it causes no symptoms and goes away on its own. It is much more common in young people, probably because we develop immunity to the virus as we get older.

Unfortunately medical students normally study about vaccines for only a short time at university and qualified doctors often don’t take the time to even read through package
inserts.
Information received by medical students and doctors is normally strongly influenced by the pharmaceutical industry.
In comparison it is often the case that vaccine critics have spent hundreds of hours, even many years independently studying vaccines and know far more than the average doctor.
We are many who are frustrated, unimpressed and tired of trying to ask about and discuss with doctors about vaccine ingredients, safety statistics, potential long term adverse events including carcinogenicity, synergy, interactions, secondary transmission, concomitant administration, etc.
It is often blatantly obvious that the average doctor has minimal knowledge about the complex issue of vaccination.

But the vaccine critics ‘hundreds of hours’ or ‘many years’ still doesn’t discount the sheer number of bona fide researchers, out in the laboratories, etc., who have overwhelmingly shown that vaccines are safe and effective.

25 vaccine critics vs thousands of vaccine researchers around the globe, who have actually spent YEARS studying immunology, public health, etc.

“Informed consent” is impossible because it implies that relevant information is
accessible. It is not. Why? Because it does not exist.
The manufacturer Merck, health authorities, doctors and other promoters lack even basic knowledge concerning Gardasil. This vaccine should never have been
approved.Incredibly, here is a list of 27 important questions, although there are even more, which they cannot answer: http://vactruth.com/2011/11/04/27-dirty-little-vaccine-secrets/
Who wants to buy a car from a pushy salesman who knows nothing about cars?

Christopher, you seem like such an angry young man. There is no need to be impolite. If you need to see proof of deaths from vaccines write to the CDC and ask for the reports of any number of the vaccines that are in use today. It is public information. Thimerosal is still used in the flu vaccine that is routinely administered to children during flu season every year. I respect your opinions, young man, but I’ve read your various comments and found you to be extremely aggressive bordering on uncivilized. I wish you well but won’t continue our banter. Warmly TM

You’re welcome! There is also a large percentage of patients with ‘vaccination status unknown’. This is important to know should your vaccinated child get a deep cut. Understand that he or she is not necessarily protected.

I was vaccinated and still got the measles and the mumps. The vaccines just don’t seem to be what they used to be… people all over North America are still catching the diseases… how can that be if these vaccines are supposed to protect us? This is what I don’t understand. This is the evidence people are starting to see…this coupled with the distrust for a government that people feel really don’t have their interests at heart… this isn’t just a vaccine issue… I honestly feel that if the public could honestly believe that the big pharma didn’t have the government in their back pocket… it would be easier to trust.

didn’t say it did. said negative outcomes were greatly reduced which is the important thing, not whether one spends a week or two moderately ill in exchange for lifelong immunity and freedom from vaccine injury.
measles hasn’t been very dangerous for quite a while in otherwise healthy, well nourished people of the right age who are appropriately nursed when they get it.

the common cold is pretty infectious, that doesn’t make it hugely dangerous , does it. when will provaxers stop confusing morbidity with mortality/other negative outcomes?

if you asked the whole population it would be. and your numbers are incorrect. there was no knowing how many cases there were as people wouldn’t call doctors for measly little childhood illnesses like the measles, especially for more than 1 child.

time lost from work isn’t mortality or dangerous outside of 3rd world countries like the usa.
adults shouldn’t have the measles, they get them because they didn’t have hem and the vaccine run out.
people being hospitalised is not much proof of anything either. not these days when people are afraid of a little raised temperature and invite complications by using paracetamol.
i can’t remember the number of deaths in france. please enlighten me with background such as prior conditions, age, treatment, nutritional status.

it will skew the numbers if no one knows how many had the measles.
deaths tend to have to be reported but my point is that you can’t compare mortality /morbidity if you don’t have the exact numbers for the former.

As to whether it is better to be vaccinated or not really depends on the parent’s assessment of risk.

“Health consequences resulting from the Tdap vaccine include encephalitis, brain damage and death. A comprehensive report made by the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) documents clearly the widespread health dangers associated with the Tdap vaccine. [7] Tdap and DTap vaccines are currently used in the United States, replacing the DTP vaccine in 1996, but all three vaccines contain the dangerous pertussis toxin with unsafe additives. [8]

As early as 1933, T. Madren reported that two babies died within
minutes of vaccination with DPT. A study published in Pediatrics in 1981 revealed that children were experiencing brain damage as a direct result of the DPT vaccines. Research done by the Institute of Medicine in the 1990’s confirmed that the DPT vaccines were responsible for brain damage. The pertussis toxin, aluminum, mercury and endotoxin contained in the DPT vaccines have been well-documented through scientific studies to cause permanent brain damage.

A search of the National Vaccine Information Center incidence reports for the DTap vaccine alone on July 21, 2013 showed 52,835 negative reactions were submitted. [10] A 7/21/13 review of the reactions to the Tdap vaccine indicated 20,179 negative reactions. [

As of August 2012, half of the 2,982 awards under the 1986 National
Childhood Vaccine Injury Act, which totaled almost $2.5 billion dollars, were made to those damaged by the Tdap, DTap or DPT vaccines. Currently children in the U.S. routinely receive 6 dosages of the DTap or Tdap vaccine at ages 2, 4, 6 months, 15-18 months, 4-6 years and at age 12. “

Not just my grandmother but anyone else who is immuno-compromised – could be the 24 year old math wiz who’ll save the planet in some way if you like (as opposed to implying that an elderly person isn’t worth as much as a child) AND those other “newborns” by the way, who aren’t yet old enough to have received the shots.

that maths wiz sounds like the pro lifers aborted baby that could have saved us meme. what about the saviour who can’t because of being disabled by regressive autism from vaccines?
pity about those newborns who could have had maternal immunity had mum had it or who get infected by shedding newly vaccinated.

`Actually animal and aborted fetal cells are used in the childhood schedule. These cells are immortal and ten whole nanograms is significant because only one cell can integrate with the DNA of the vaccine recipiant and induce tumours..From the FDA’s briefing document: “Small amounts of residual cell substrate DNA unavoidably occur in all viral vaccines as well as other biologics produced using cell substrates. There are several potential ways DNA could be a risk factor. DNA can be oncogenic or infectious; in addition, it can cause insertion mutagenesis through integration into the host genome. Don’t forget this is never studied and it clearly states that on the package insert.

Doctors and scientists if they are in the pockets of Big Pharma are a very bad source of information. I had to tell my doctor what was in the flu shot when he suggested it to me. He didn’t have a clue.

Blindness/eye damage caused by measles has been determined through science, and it has been demonstrated that measels untreated cause corneal ulcers/ulcerative keratitis. I cannot find one journal/reference/study that says measeles virus has no possibility of damaging the eye.

Conversely, the majority of scientific studies have demonstrated time and time and time again that side effects from vaccines are incredibly minor compared to the health advantage. Minor fevers that dissipate in days and pain where the needle was given.

As far as deaths from vaccines, again it is a matter of correlation and causality. There is for example no causal link between the administering of the vaccines and sudden infant death, however, these vaccines are administered at a time when babies can suffer sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS).,. In other words, the SIDS deaths are co-incidental to vaccination and would have occurred even if no vaccinations had been given. It is important to remember that these four diseases are life-threatening and babies who are not vaccinated against them are at serious risk of death or serious disability.

Do that mean a vaccine hasn’t contributed to a death ever? No, But the vast, massive, overwhelming majority of people who receive vaccines will be fine and vaccines have saved millions and millions and millions of children from death and disease since the 1930s.

Linda, you really try to sell yourself as an expert! Suggest you join the commentators on the CNN website talking about the CDC scandal of hiding the known link between MMR and autism: http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-1164827

Your doctor was not correct when talking about ability to induce immunity.

Your doctor was correct if talking about the community … when you get enough people using a vaccine*, the chances that an accidental importation of that disease will find someone to spread to is darn close to zero.

*It varies with the vaccine and the disease … measles is very very infectious, and 95% coverage is needed to stop outbreaks. When you get a cluster of people with low vaccine rates, it can rip through that group quickly.

Why would I bother with some unconfirmed report uploaded by a random user on the internet in an attempt to make it appear as though CNN has actually done investigative journalism?

Furthermore, why would I give credence to such whistleblowing, when the person who has been outed as the ‘whistleblower’ distances himself from said report?

As far as Hooker’s use of the CDC data, you can’t just take data from a case control study and make it fit a cohort study. Epidemiology doesn’t work that way, and if Hooker ever finds an epidemiologist, he might actually learn that.

Explain why adverse effect for vaccines wouldn’t be reported, but when you take anti-gas medicines, sleep aids, birth control pills, fertility drugs, the many, many, many side effects and potential side effects are listed, including the littlest things like headaches, soreness at injection site, ect? There ads for meds in mags that have a full 2 pages on the other side listing every little last thing
Are you suggesting that vaccines, also manufactured by the same pharma companies, somehow get around that, or they withhold info for one med and not the other? That makes less than no sense.

You use a far larger amount of the toxin, deactivated (it’s called a “toxoid”) to give the immune system something to work on. (It ignores things that are in tiny quantities)

And you use an adjuvant to enhance the immune response (adjuvants basically throw rocks at the immune system’s watchdog cells to get their attention … they cause some local inflammation and that’s a signal that something needs attention.)

“MDCK is a canine kidney cell line isolated in the late 1950s from normal
cocker spaniel tissue [1]. With time, several strains of MDCK were
developed, which differ in terms of cell size, tubulogenesis potential
and polarity markers expression [2]. MDCK cells have been extensively
used to study protein trafficking and the establishment of cell polarity
in epithelia [3,4], but also have more applied uses such as viral
production for the vaccine industry [5].”

past infancy and before puberty. having it then will ensure immunity , thus not getting it later, and protect infants through breastfeeding.
inappropriate nursing, nothing to do with age , would be fever lowering drugs and a lack of bed rest, darkened room for instance.

“none of us remember anyone dying” “none of that counts against pro vax statistics.”

Instead of asking people about anyone they remember dying, we look at death certificates and hospital records for cause of death. It’s a bit more accurate.

I don’t personally know anyone who has died of Hanta virus or Bubonic plague … but the New Mexico health department has the information. I don’t know anyone who has died of yellow fever either, but if I’m ever travelling to a country where it exists, I’m getting the vaccine.

Actually, your fully vaccinated kids are putting grandma at risk. They are contagious for up to six week following this vaccine. Sort of an inconvenient fact and indisputable since the manufacture of the vaccine lists it on the insert. The following excerpt is taken from the package insert for the Merk combined Varicella +MMR vaccine listed under warning and precautions:

5.8 Risk of Vaccine Virus Transmission
Post-licensing experience with VARIVAX suggests that transmission of varicella vaccine virus may occur between healthy vaccine recipients (who develop or do not develop a varicella-like rash) and contacts susceptible to varicella, as well as high-risk individuals susceptible to varicella. High-risk individuals susceptible to varicella include:
 Immunocompromised individuals;
 Pregnant women without documented positive history of varicella (chickenpox) or laboratory
evidence of prior infection;
 Newborn infants of mothers without documented positive history of varicella or laboratory
evidence of prior infection and all newborn infants born at <28 weeks gestation regardless of maternal varicella immunity.
Vaccine recipients should attempt to avoid, to the extent possible, close association with high-risk individuals susceptible to varicella for up to 6 weeks following vaccination. In circumstances where contact with high-risk individuals susceptible to varicella is unavoidable, the potential risk of transmission of the varicella vaccine virus should be weighed against the risk of acquiring and transmitting wild-type varicella virus.
Excretion of small amounts of the live, attenuated rubella virus from the nose or throat has occurred in the majority of susceptible individuals 7 to 28 days after vaccination. There is no confirmed evidence to
indicate that such virus is transmitted to susceptible persons who are in contact with the vaccinated individuals. Consequently, transmission through close personal contact, while accepted as a theoretical
possibility, is not regarded as a significant risk. However, transmission of the rubella vaccine virus to infants via breast milk has been documented [see Use in Specific Populations (8.3)]. There are no reports of transmission of the more attenuated Enders' Edmonston strain of measles virus or the Jeryl Lynn™ strain of mumps virus from vaccine recipients to susceptible contacts.

The HPV vaccine is perceived as more ‘dangerous’ than the others but what make that vaccine unique is that it is being rolled out on a mass scale to tweens and young adults rather than to infants and very young children. The 149 deaths that have occurred in young women happened days, hours, minutes after receiving the vaccine. When an infant dies following vaccination it is deemed SIDS.

“Unfortunately medical students normally study about vaccines for only a short time at university and qualified doctors often don’t take the time to even read through package inserts.”

You are demanding a level of expertise of physicians that you aren’t going to get anywhere, from any profession, ever.

Would you be angry if a mechanic told you, “the recommended maintenance for this model is ____” and expect them to be not only a good mechanic but have the ability to design and build the car too?

If a pediatrician downloads and follows the CDC recommended schedule for vaccines, that pediatrician is getting advice (on paper) from the dozens of immunologists, physicians, epidemiologists and other people who have dedicated their entire careers to those diseases and ways to prevent them.

Why are you expecting a pediatrician to have all the in-depth knowledge of an immunologist, a virologist, and epidemiologist AND a biochemist?

The tetanus vaccine will not start creating antibodies in your child’s body for three weeks leaving him or her unprotected during that time. The doctor attending you will be able to confirm this. Your best bet is to ask for the Tetanus Immune Globulin TIG (an anti-toxin) accompanied with antibiotics. Antibiotics are important to start before the tetanus toxin is released at which point the antibiotics are useless.

This is the pharma shill gambit, and is a vile insult to medical professionals. As to what is in the flu vaccine, since none of the ingredients have been shown to cause health problems in the vaccine, with very few and documented contraindications, the point is moot.

Actually, fully vaccinated kids are putting everyone ‘at risk’. Sort of an inconvenient fact and indisputable since the manufacture of this vaccine lists it on the insert. Children are contagious for up to six week after receiving the Merk combined Varicella +MMR vaccine. The following excerpt is taken from the package insert listed under warning and precautions:

5.8 Risk of Vaccine Virus Transmission
Post-licensing experience with VARIVAX suggests that transmission of varicella vaccine virus may occur between healthy vaccine recipients (who develop or do
not develop a varicella-like rash) and contacts susceptible to varicella, as well as high-risk individuals susceptible to varicella.
High-risk individuals susceptible to varicella include:
 Immunocompromised individuals;
 Pregnant women without documented positive history of varicella (chickenpox) or laboratory
evidence of prior infection;
 Newborn infants of mothers without documented positive history of varicella or laboratory
evidence of prior infection and all newborn infants born at <28 weeks gestation regardless of maternal varicella immunity.
Vaccine
recipients should attempt to avoid, to the extent possible, close
association with high-risk individuals susceptible to varicella for up
to 6 weeks following vaccination. In circumstances where contact with
high-risk individuals susceptible to varicella is unavoidable, the
potential risk of transmission of the varicella vaccine virus should be
weighed against the risk of acquiring and transmitting wild-type
varicella virus. Excretion of small amounts of the live, attenuated
rubella virus from the nose or throat has occurred in the majority of
susceptible individuals 7 to 28 days after vaccination. There is no
confirmed evidence to indicate that such virus is transmitted to
susceptible persons who are in contact with the vaccinated individuals.
Consequently, transmission through close personal contact, while
accepted as a theoretical possibility, is not regarded as a
significant risk. However, transmission of the rubella vaccine virus to
infants via breast milk has been documented [see Use in Specific
Populations (8.3)]. There are no reports of transmission of the more
attenuated Enders' Edmonston strain of measles virus or the Jeryl Lynn™
strain of mumps virus from vaccine recipients to susceptible contacts.

“do you not think that people notice bad things happening in their own communities?”

Not to the level of detail that a health department would.

And, they often don’t. It’s predictable that after a heinous crime is discovered that at least half the neighbors interviewed will say, “We had no idea they were _____. ” When in retrospect, the clues were all there.

Linda the cell line has been shown to be tumerogenic – in order to test it’s safety it is tested on nude mice. If it doesn’t produce tumours it is good to go for people. That is not a good enough reassurance for me as mice and people are not the same animals. Do you totally trust vaccine manufacturers when they have a history of corruption and greed. Also the testing for the vaccine varies from lab to lab. We are fools if we think our risks are small, especially as cancer rates are rising exponentially. Also because vaccines are not tested for their ability to cause cancer- always stated on the product insert – no liability and a free ride for Big Pharma. In fact it is a wonderful way to increase their long term financial health.

Read the following document from the fda – it is full references to the dangers of tumorigenic cells lines not just MDCK cells.also VERO

ww.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/05/briefing/5-4188B1_3.pdf

“Manufacturers of influenza vaccines have taken note of the potential advantages of using MDCK cells in vaccine production. MDCK cells are a continuous (immortal), neoplastic cell line with the potential to become highly tumorigenic.
Because no vaccine licensed in the U.S. has been produced in a tumorigenic cell substrate, OVRR would like to update the VRBPAC on the approach it has taken to the regulation of neoplastic cell substrates in general and to review with the
Committee its approach to addressing issues associated with cell-substrate tumorigenicity”

“These types of assays have revealed that different cells have differing capacities to form tumors: some cells are weakly tumorigenic (i.e., requiring large numbers of cells – 106
or more – to produce a tumor), while others are highly tumorigenic (i.e., requiring as few as 1 to 100 cells to produce a tumor).”

Interesting – No double blind placebo as ever been done with any of the existing vaccines – even though each vaccine contains a unique set of possibly toxic ingredients – it is tested against another vaccine with a different set of possibly toxic ingredients. Like a tobacco company testing cigarettes for cancer and having two groups smoking different brands – if one group has no more cancer than the other brand the cigarettes are safe.

“The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires extensive safety testing before vaccines are licensed. Before a new vaccine can be licensed by the FDA, it must first be tested by something called “concomitant use studies.” Concomitant use studies require new vaccines to be tested with existing vaccines.

Also you would know that the excuse given for not doing controlled randomised double blind studies on vaccines is always: controlled randomized double blind studies are unethical in certain circumstances, including the testing of vaccines.”

But your opinion is uninformed. There are single dose flu vaccines available which can be given to pregnant women. Along with that, there is no evidence that thimerosal affects the brain of the unborn baby in any way. The blood brain barrier is not nearly as permeable as you’d like to think.

“Consequently, transmission through close personal contact, while accepted as a theoretical possibility, is not regarded as a
significant risk.”
So, no, vaccinated kids are not ‘putting everyone at risk’. Did you not even read your own source? You do understand that product inserts are legal documents, wherein they have to mention every remote possibility, right? It’s like the set of kid’s pajamas that comes with the warning saying, “Cape does not enable wearer to fly.”

I invite you to do a search for the manufacture’s vaccine inserts for all vaccines currently prescribed to children today. These inserts will state clearly the risks every child faces when he/she received a vaccine. No time travel needed ;)

No, they have not spent hours or years ‘independently studying’ vaccines. They’ve spent a lot of time reading what’s written about vaccines by other people who also don’t have the science background or training to understand what they’re looking at, along with a few who are deliberately selling the lie in order to sell other products. How much of a financial stake do Joe Mercola, Mike Adams, Sherri Tenpenny have in making sure that people follow their lead on vaccines? How about Barbara Loe Fisher, whose entire life is wrapped up in the organization she founded and runs, based on nothing much but her firm belief in something that has since been shown to be incorrect?
You’re also forgetting, or conveniently ignoring, that medical students spend hours and years learning about the whole process of disease, and the human body, including the immune system. No, they probably don’t spend a lot of time specifically on vaccines. I doubt they spend weeks learning about penicillin, either, but the knowledge necessary to really understand this involves much more than being able to recite the list of ingredients.
On top of all that, doctors stand on the shoulders of all those scientists who have spent years and sometimes their whole lives studying immunity and vaccines and individual diseases. Why you expect them to reinvent the wheel with every graduating class, I really don’t know.
The knowledge behind your doctor’s recommendation of vaccines amounts to the cumulative efforts of thousands of experts over at least a hundred years. In contrast to that, you want to talk about how much you know as a result of a few hours of reading.

You mean because you’re not trying your darndest to frighten people away from vaccination now, using all the standard antivaccine talking points? Who cares if you were AV before or not? It’s obvious you are now.

Chris – I am not uninformed. Many pregnant women wouldn’t have a clue about asking for a single shot. Most of the flu vaccines encouraged are multivial. It just goes to show how little we can trust our government and Big Pharma.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thiomersal
Ethylmercury is eliminated from the brain in about 14 days in infant monkeys. Risk assessment for effects on the nervous system have been made by extrapolating from dose-response relationships for methylmercury.[16]Methylmercury and ethylmercury distributes to all body tissues, crossing the blood–brain barrier and the placental barrier, and ethylmercury also moves freely throughout the body

Professor Poland would disagree with you about measles – it has a high failure rate and he suggests a new vaccine needs to be manufactured’

http://tinyurl.com/ok4b294
Professor Poland has this to say about the measles vaccine – he admits that the high failure rate makes herd immunity impossible and he calls for a new generation vaccine. He also points out that herd immunity is impossible because of this failure rate.

Gregory A. Poland, MD, MACP, FIDSA, DHL (Hon)Director, Mayo Clinic’s Vaccine Research Group Professor of Medicine and Infectious Diseases, the Director of the Immunization Clinic and theDirector of the Program in Translational Immunovirology and Biodefense Mayo Clinic – Editor in Cbief Vaccine.
“Multiple studies demonstrate that 2–10% of those immunized with two doses of measles vaccine fail to develop protective antibody levels, and that immunity can wane over time and result in infection (so-called secondary vaccine failure) when the individual is exposed to measles. For example, during the 1989–1991 U.S. measles outbreaks 20–40% of the individuals affected had been previously immunized with one to two doses of vaccine. In an October 2011 outbreak in Canada, over 50% of the 98 individuals had received two doses of measles vaccine. The Table shows that this phenomenon continues to play a role in measles outbreaks. Thus, measles outbreaks also occur even among highly vaccinated populations because of primary and secondary vaccine failure, which results in gradually larger pools of susceptible persons and outbreaks once measles is introduced [8]. This leads to a paradoxical situation whereby measles in highly immunized societies occurs primarily among those previously immunized [8].

You can’t cherry pick the facts you like and dismiss the ones you don’t. Can vaccinated individuals spread the disease they were vaccinated for? – YES. The manufacturer states that clearly.

This fact is in no way ‘theoretical’. Please read the article by NBC news: “Polio is spreading in Nigeria and health
officials say in some cases it’s caused by the vaccine used to fight the
paralyzing disease.”

Where conflict of interest has been called into question. Repeatedly. If pharmaceutical companies want regain parents’ trust they need only pay an independent research facility to run double blind placebo tests on all of their vaccines to prove once and for all that vaccines are safe.

You volunteering your children for that? Do you have any clue what you’re asking for? Thousands of children, entered into the trial the minute they’re born (or maybe before, to satisfy the paranoia about flu shots for pregnant women), randomly divided into groups, some to receive vaccines (one or all or some), without their parents knowing which group they’re in, tracked for at least 20 years, all without anyone knowing whether they’ve been protected against disease or not. All of those children will be in schools with other children who might have compromised immunity. They’ll be around people who might be carrying contagious diseases, and no one will have any idea how vulnerable they might be to those diseases. Some of them will be getting pregnant and won’t know if they’re protected against rubella or chicken pox.
Again, are you planning to volunteer your children for that study? Do you know thousands of parents who are that stupid? Do you know any researchers who are that unethical? Good luck.

You are absolutely right! Parents who don’t want their children vaccinated would never agree to that. What we need is a control group. Families who don’t intend to vaccinate their children anyway can be tracked along side a group of children who are vaccinated. Your idea is perfect! From the minute that they are born every five years until they are about 20. When I have children I don’t intend to vaccinate and would definitely volunteer to participate in such a study. You’re brilliant CHrisKis. Brilliant!

Actually, your fully vaccinated kids are putting grandma at risk. They are contagious for up to six week following this vaccine. Sort of an inconvenient fact and indisputable since the manufacture of the vaccine lists it on the insert. The following excerpt is taken from the package insert for the Merk combined Varicella +MMR vaccine listed under warning and precautions:

5.8 Risk of Vaccine Virus Transmission
Post-licensing experience with VARIVAX suggests that transmission of varicella vaccine virus may occur between healthy vaccine recipients (who develop or do not develop a varicella-like rash) and contacts susceptible to varicella, as well as high-risk individuals susceptible to varicella. High-risk individuals susceptible to varicella include:
 Immunocompromised individuals;
 Pregnant women without documented positive history of varicella (chickenpox) or laboratory
evidence of prior infection;
 Newborn infants of mothers without documented positive history of varicella or laboratory
evidence of prior infection and all newborn infants born at <28 weeks gestation regardless of maternal varicella immunity.
Vaccine recipients should attempt to avoid, to the extent possible, close association with high-risk individuals susceptible to varicella for up to 6 weeks following vaccination. In circumstances where contact with high-risk individuals susceptible to varicella is unavoidable, the potential risk of transmission of the varicella vaccine virus should be weighed against the risk of acquiring and transmitting wild-type varicella virus.
Excretion of small amounts of the live, attenuated rubella virus from the nose or throat has occurred in the majority of susceptible individuals 7 to 28 days after vaccination. There is no confirmed evidence to
indicate that such virus is transmitted to susceptible persons who are in contact with the vaccinated individuals. Consequently, transmission through close personal contact, while accepted as a theoretical
possibility, is not regarded as a significant risk. However, transmission of the rubella vaccine virus to infants via breast milk has been documented [see Use in Specific Populations (8.3)]. There are no reports of transmission of the more attenuated Enders' Edmonston strain of measles virus or the Jeryl Lynn™ strain of mumps virus from vaccine recipients to susceptible contacts.

Taken directly from the CDC website: Varicalla in Vaccinated Persons (termed Breakthrough Varicella) – People with breakthrough varicella are contagious. One study of varicella transmission in a household setting found that persons with mild breakthrough varicella (< 50 lesions) were one third as contagious as unvaccinated persons with varicella. However, persons with breakthrough varicella with 50 or more lesions can be just as contagious as unvaccinated persons.

Varicalla in Vaccinated Persons (termed Breakthrough Varicella) – People with breakthrough varicella are contagious. One study of varicella transmission in a household setting found that persons with mild breakthrough varicella (< 50 lesions) were one third as contagious as unvaccinated persons with varicella. However, persons with breakthrough varicella with 50 or more lesions canbe just as contagious as unvaccinated persons. This information is copied from the CDC website

Actually, your fully vaccinated kids are putting grandma at risk. They are contagious for up to six week following this vaccine. Sort of an inconvenient fact and indisputable since the manufacture of the vaccine lists it on the insert. The following excerpt is taken from the package insert for the Merk combined Varicella +MMR vaccine listed under warning and precautions:

5.8 Risk of Vaccine Virus Transmission
Post-licensing experience with VARIVAX suggests that transmission of varicella vaccine virus may occur between healthy vaccine recipients (who develop or do not develop a varicella-like rash) and contacts susceptible to varicella, as well as high-risk individuals susceptible to varicella. High-risk individuals susceptible to varicella include:
 Immunocompromised individuals;
 Pregnant women without documented positive history of varicella (chickenpox) or laboratory
evidence of prior infection;
 Newborn infants of mothers without documented positive history of varicella or laboratory
evidence of prior infection and all newborn infants born at <28 weeks gestation regardless of maternal varicella immunity.
Vaccine recipients should attempt to avoid, to the extent possible, close association with high-risk individuals susceptible to varicella for up to 6 weeks following vaccination. In circumstances where contact with high-risk individuals susceptible to varicella is unavoidable, the potential risk of transmission of the varicella vaccine virus should be weighed against the risk of acquiring and transmitting wild-type varicella virus.
Excretion of small amounts of the live, attenuated rubella virus from the nose or throat has occurred in the majority of susceptible individuals 7 to 28 days after vaccination. There is no confirmed evidence to
indicate that such virus is transmitted to susceptible persons who are in contact with the vaccinated individuals. Consequently, transmission through close personal contact, while accepted as a theoretical
possibility, is not regarded as a significant risk. However, transmission of the rubella vaccine virus to infants via breast milk has been documented [see Use in Specific Populations (8.3)]. There are no reports of transmission of the more attenuated Enders' Edmonston strain of measles virus or the Jeryl Lynn™ strain of mumps virus from vaccine recipients to susceptible contacts.

Translation: “it’s easy for sabelmouse to not be afraid because she’s totally clueless as the possible complications of measles and couldn’t care less if a few children die or get encephalitis or become deaf as a result of the disease.

Sorry, but you keep demonstrating your lack of understanding on this. A control group is not one that is self-selected. It’s not ‘a few subjects here and there’. It’s not one that might well vary in other significant ways from the one being tested. It’s a large number of subjects, chosen because they have very similar characteristics, in as many ways as possible, to the test group. The very fact that you *chose* to leave your children unvaccinated speaks of other major differences between your family’s lifestyle and that of others who do vaccinate. I’m sorry you don’t really grasp this, but it’s nice to see you trying.

Taken directly from the CDC website. Varicalla in Vaccinated Persons (termed Breakthrough Varicella) – People
with breakthrough varicella are contagious. One study of varicella
transmission in a household setting found that persons with mild
breakthrough varicella (< 50 lesions) were one third as contagious as
unvaccinated persons with varicella. However, persons with breakthrough
varicella with 50 or more lesions canbe just as contagious as
unvaccinated persons.

I’m not talking about ‘self selected’. Even drug companies have to solicit people to participate in their testing. I have often seen advertising by laboratories looking for volunteers to be part of drug testing. I was even asked, though I don’t have children, if I would like my children to participate in such a test for the chicken pox vaccine and in exchange the vaccine in question would be free. The nurse seemed pretty anxious to fill her quota and wasn’t overly discerning about her potential test subjects – anyone would do! Why would you oppose tracking two groups over the course of several years? In fact, those who elect not to vaccinate would have very similar belief systems and lifestyles. It couldn’t be more perfect.

You silly goose. You keep using this nonsensical argument about measles being mild and basically “harmless” among “healthy, well-nourished people who are appropriately nursed,” as though the 1950s were the middle ages! People were well-nourished and healthy then, too, and they STILL DIED. Look up how many died of chicken pox the year before the vaccine came out.

And really, you’re just disgusting when you make these claims because you seem to care little at all for children who AREN’T healthy and well-nourished because they’re living in poverty, or are neglected. So it’s perfectly okay with you if these kids die of a preventable disease rather than avoid it by being vaccinated safely and effectively.

Oh, get off it. Don’t tone troll me. My name isn’t Christopher, you’re not my mother, and I might well be old enough to be yours. Anything else you want to assume and get wrong? It’s no wonder you have trouble gathering real evidence and information, if you’re that quick to think you know something, just from your first impression. Not just know it, but act on it.
Next time, do try to be just slightly less condescending, okay? You come across as uptight and snotty.

I can’t believe you just did what you did. You cut out part of the text of that link to make it seem like it says what you want it to say.

This is what Steve wrote:

“THE FOLLOWING ADVERSE EVENTS HAVE BEEN SPONTANEOUSLY REPORTED DURING
POST-APPROVAL USE OF GARDASIL. Blood and [….]”

And so on. This is what the link actually says (direct cut-n-paste):

“The following adverse events have been spontaneously reported during post-approval use of GARDASIL. Because these events were reported voluntarily from a population of uncertain size, it is not possible to reliably estimate their frequency or to establish a causal relationship to vaccine exposure. Blood and […]”

Steve, this is called “lying”. I notice you even caps-locked it, like a typical Anti-vaxer. You lose.

I think it is relevant as we are discussing the safety of vaccines. As the FDA say they cannot guarantee that vaccines are free of oncogenic animal, fetal cells etc – we need to be aware of this when we are making our decision to vaccinate.

SeanP you might be correct for the other common vaccines but HPV vaccine has 100 times more adverse reactions than other vaccines and most are long term severely disabling autoimmune reactions. It is the same story in every country that it is being used: USA, UK, Canada, France, Japan, Spain, India, Denmark, Colombia.

Both Merck and GSK state “vaccination is not a substitute
for routine cervical screening. Since no vaccine is 100% effective and Gardasil
will not provide protection against every HPV type, or against existing HPV
infections, routine cervical screening remains critically important”.

HPV Cervarix vaccine (GSK) has effiicacy of approximately 99% for preventing just 2 types of HPV: 16 and 18.

Both vaccines are typically administered to 12 year old children.
The vaccines are only proven to be effective for several years.
The typical period for cervical cancer to develop is 10 – 20 years.

In the UK the mortality rate for cervical cancer has reduced from 8 per 100,000 to 2 per 100,000 since 1971 without any contribution from the HPV vaccine. If this continues there will be no more deaths within 7 years.

Why are governments paying 100’s of millions of £’s to maim,
injure and kill our children? The illness it is targeted to reduce (there are many other risk factors), is already in rapid decline and could be eliminated before any benefits of the vaccine will be seen.

A claim like that requires a good reference. A random third party web site is not a good reference. Besides, even if the HPV vaccine carries a higher risk, that risk still pales in comparison to kids in a car, accidents at home, sports injuries….

Varicella is not polio. Different bug, chicken pox. Yes the chicken pox vaccine uses a live attenuated strain of the chicken pox virus. Polio uses a killed strain of the polio virus for vaccination. So while breakthrough reactions occur with the chicken pox vaccine, the polio vaccine has been used since the early 1960’s to practically rid the world of that disease. To insinuate that all vaccinations can cause the disease is simply ignorant of the facts on how vaccines are made and highly irresponsible.

Self-selected is exactly what you’re talking about, and it speaks to your lack of knowledge that you don’t understand that. Self-selected means you chose what trial group to be in.
“In face, those who elect not to vaccinate would have very similar belief systems and lifestyles.” They might. They might not. You miss the point. The point is, the test groups need to be matched as closely as possible in all variables except the one being tested. Do you think that’s going to work if you just select antivaccine parents for one group and those who vaccinate for the other? On top of that, the disparity in size of the the groups would cause all sorts of problems with whether results are statistically significant.
I don’t know what trial you might have been asked to enroll your children in, but since you didn’t you really don’t know how it was being done or what it was looking at, either.
In the real world, the best way to do those studies is retrospectively, looking at different groups to see how their outcomes compare, so that you can keep the variables as controlled as possible. That’s actually been done, with all the studies looking at any connection between vaccines and autism. There isn’t any.
It’s also been done in Germany in this study: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3057555/

The results? “The lifetime prevalence of diseases preventable by vaccination was markedly higher in unvaccinated than in vaccinated subjects.” “The prevalence of allergic diseases and non-specific infections in children and adolescents was not found to depend on vaccination status.”

Shaving facilitated serious vaccinia infection from small pox vaccine in US airman – “The infection occurred at the same site where the man had received a tattoo 5 days earlier, and it appeared that the virus had spread from his roommate, who had been vaccinated 3 weeks earlier. The roommate had not kept his vaccination lesion covered at all times and had mistakenly used the patient’s towel.”

In my case it didn’t come up because we live in different parts of the country but the difference is that I know what my child has had. But yes, everyone was told after she had her shots in case they were sick and thus could make up their own minds. There’s a reason there’s a social contract we all sort of agree to in living together – so we can make more assumptions and not have to ask about every possible thing.

So you acknowledge that your child is a potential risk to others
following vaccination? Did you keep your child locked in a room for six weeks during that time? Did you warn the people siting next to you on the bus or in any other public setting because if you didn’t then you are a hypocrite through and through.

Many parents aren’t anti vaccine. Many would give their children single doses if they were still available. Finding a way to assuage parents fears can only be done with this kind of study. Aggressively asserting that vaccines are completely safe isn’t going to sway anyone’s opinion. You just aren’t very convincing. You sound more like a pharma rep trolling the discussion boards than a rational individual.

Why don’t you go up one and scold tamara, too, while you’re at it. Also, why don’t you focus on the substance of the discussion instead of supporting personal comments.
While we’re at it, I have to say that this illustrates why you have so much trouble with the issue at hand, since you’re so quick to act on nothing but assumption. I don’t suppose it occurred to you, and more than it did to your friend up there, that you have no idea of my gender. Bronze medal for conclusion jumping, though.

So what you are saying is that the people infected by vaccine shedding in Nigeria are not worthy of any consideration? Wrong continent too bad for you? Why are pharmaceutical companies even allowed to use that form of the vaccine? It’s cheaper but not ethical.

Any scientist who has stood up to challenge the safety of vaccines has been vilified. They are bullied and their careers are destroyed. Whenever there are any findings that prove that vaccine carry risks there is a total media black out on this information. The government has lost public confidence. Pneumonia, encephalitis, meningitis, anaphylaxis is a short list of serious side effects listed on vaccine inserts. To pretend that vaccines carry no risk and are ‘perfectly safe’ is irresponsible.

A friend’s son lost his speech and the ability to walk within a week of his MMR shot. To this day his doctor refuses to acknowledge the boy suffered an adverse reaction to the vaccine and also refused to file a report. As for adverse reactions you can google the insert for every vaccine on the market and they are every bit as scary as any other medicine out there. Why then can we question the safety of other medication but God help us if we ask the simple question,”could vaccines be harming our children?”

“Any scientist who has stood up to challenge the safety of vaccines has been vilified. They are bullied and their careers are destroyed.”
Got evidence? Got names?

If there’s such a total media blackout on this information, how come I keep seeing it all over the internet?

List of side effects? From product inserts? Okay. How often do they happen? What’s the percentage of risk?

“To pretend that vaccines carry no risk and are ‘perfectly safe’ is irresponsible.”
It would be, if anyone were doing this, but no one is. You can’t post the side effects listed in the product information and then in the very next sentence claim that no one admits to any of those. If you can’t even be consistent in your own argument, why should anyone listen to you?

No, I didn’t actually say anything about the people in Nigeria. However, since the article that led to this discussion is about parents refusing vaccines in Canada, it didn’t seem to apply, really. Why are doctors allowed to use that form of the vaccine? Because it’s not only cheaper, easier to use, easier to transport, and quite safe, it’s actually more effective for inducing initial immunity, which is important where the disease is still endemic. It’s perfectly ethical. Its safety profile is still hugely far ahead of the disease it prevents.

The only ones who keep dragging out the idea that vaccines are ‘completely safe’ are those who would prefer not to have them at all. It’s a common strawman, but that’s all it is, just a scarecrow. And not the kind who gets any brains. Nothing in life is completely safe, but vaccines are orders of magnitude safer than the diseases they prevent. Evidence of that safety is all around us in the form of healthy children and adults, who didn’t suffer or die from those diseases, because they were vaccinated. Good, solid information is a good way to assuage parental fears, but you and your ilk keep spreading around misinformation calculated to create fear.

I wondered how long it would be until you broke out the ‘shill’ nonsense. Who pays you to troll these discussions?

Jesus Christ: Homeopathy does not work. It can’t. The way it’s made, there wouldn’t even be one molecule of the substance left in all the water in the world. Plus, it relies on “water memory.” Um… an inorganic cannot have a memory. There’s no mind. No mind, no memory.

“…she advocates that chemically based vaccines be replaced with homeopathic versions.”

There is no such thing as a homeopathic version of a vaccine (and since that’s not an attributed quote, I’m talking to you, Toronto Life). There are homeopathic alternatives to vaccines, just as a trip to Casino Rama is an alternative to an RRSP contribution. Except that casinos have non-zero payout, wherease homeopathic preparations have zero active ingredients.

It’s a shame that very resonable points — like paying attention to the manufacturer’s own recommendation regarding reaction to aluminum — are getting lumped in with the extremos. People asking for less gluten in their pizza crust are getting more respect than those asking for less organic mercury compounds in their vaccines. That’s backwards.

Just because a few people can’t follow protocol after a vaccination doesn’t mean all vaccines will cause the disease. All it means is that people who can’t follow protocol can spread the attuned disease. This is av far cry from the mass hysteria you are trying to spread with your ill informed lack of critical thinking skills.

“The Vaccine Truthers: why parents shun life-saving shots”
Because they are ignorant and selfish and are willing to jeopardize their child’s immediate and long term health to proclaim themselves as “special” and belong to a group.
There, I saved you four pages of writing.

“What few people understand is that a placebo group is not used when assessing the safety of a vaccine”
I suggest you try Google scholar for “placebo vaccine study”
Choose any one of the 200 thousand placebo-controlled studies you would like to discuss, and get back to us.

All the deaths “following” HPV vaccine have been medically investigated, and none have been linked back to the vaccine. Some of those deaths have happened up to 6 months after the vaccine, some have clearly no possible link (eg person died in MVA 2 weeks later)

As you yourself said, and I quote:“HPV Gardasil vaccine (Merck)has efficacy of approx. 97% for preventing just 4 types of HPV: 6, 11, 16 and 18.
HPV Cervarix vaccine (GSK) has effiicacy of approximately 99% for preventing just 2 types of HPV: 16 and 18.”

Well, isn’t that extremely fortunate, since those very same strains of HPV are the ones that cause 70-75% of the cancers.
Why would you deny someone the protection of a vaccine that would cut the risks of a form of cancer by three quarters?

Overall this article provides some insight into the mindset of antivaccine parents/activists. In every case, their child has become unwell for a reason unconnected to vaccination, and they have consulted a holistic practitioner, a homeopath or a chiropracter, or some other alternative woo practitioner for a diagnosis.

Is it any surprise the quacks then arrive at a diagnosis “Vaccines did it – they are full of toxins”, quickly followed by “Here, try this really good detoxifying remedy. I take VISA, AMEX, Mastercard, or a cheque, but cash is preferable. Just make sure you have lots of it”?

OK Mike Stevens – post ONE study of a vaccine in the current schedule that is used a double blind placebo study ie vaccinated vs fully unvaccinated cohorts. You won’t be able to because there are none. Make sure the one you post is able to be fully opened and is readable. Otherwise stop spreading mis-information for Big Pharma. I look forward to reading this study.

In an interview in the April 2014 issue (no. 66) of the magazine Principes de Santé (Health Principles), Dr. Dalbergue, who has worked for over twenty years with the industry, describes the widespread corruption and his concern that the health of patients is sacrificed on the altar of profitability.
Dr. Dalbergue stated:
I predict that Gardasil will become the greatest medical scandal of all times because at some point in time, the evidence will add up to prove that this vaccine has absolutely no effect on cervical cancer and that all the very many adverse effects which destroy lives and even kill, serve no other purpose than to generate profit for the manufacturers.
According to Dr. Dalbergue the pharmaceutical industry has hardened considerably during the last decade, as shown by increased violations of ethics, manipulation of clinical trial data, widespread corruption, gross conflicts of interest and generally less emphasis on pharmacovigilance.

Since May, more than 240 girls have reported headaches, fainting and numbness in the hands after vaccination. Their parents said that the girls, ranging in ages from 9 to 16, were recently injected with Gardasil-a vaccine to against human papillomavirus, or HPV, which has been linked to cervical cancer.

In 2009, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) published data showing over a two year period, adolescent girls and women between the ages of 9 to 26 injected with the vaccine reported nausea, headaches and autoimmune disorders, whose symptoms include numbness and dizziness. The CDC also cited reports of 32 patient deaths occurring after receiving Gardasil.

An accompanying article published in the Journal of the American Medical Association questioned the benefits of the vaccine versus the risks noting that medical knowledge is “typically incomplete and ambiguous.”

Ahhh… the reason behind your dissembling is now clear.
You want studies of completely unvaccinated children…you know, that sort of thing which is completely unethical and which would fail to be passed by any ethical committee because it leaves kids vulnerable to other diseases.
i don’t think you will get that.

Why won’t the study I cited count as evidence? You’d think that the finding that vaccine averted 21 invasive HiB infections (around 40% mortality) in a group of 2588 kids would be cause for celebration on your part.
Well it would if you cared about child health, like I do.

2588 were assigned to receive the vaccine and 2602 to receive placebo. The mean follow-up was 269 days in the vaccine group and 267 days in the placebo group. Before the age of 18 months, there was 1 systemic H. influenzae type b infection in the vaccine group, as compared with 22 in the placebo group (P less than 0.001; point estimate of efficacy, 95 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 72 to 99 percent). Of the 22 H. influenzae type b infections in the placebo group, 13 were meningitis. Among the children who received both doses, there was 1 H. influenzae type b infection in the vaccine group (n = 2056) and 14 in the placebo group (n = 2105) (P less than 0.001; point estimate of efficacy, 93 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 53 to 98 percent). The single infection in the vaccine group occurred at 15 1/2 months of age in an infant with osteomyelitis. Between the first and second doses there were no H. influenzae type b infections in the vaccine group and eight in the placebo group (P less than 0.005; point estimate of efficacy, 100 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, 41 to 100 percent).

Well over 80% of those catching measles in the recent U.S. outbreaks were not vaccinated, some by choice, some because they were too young. You can’t look at the general vaccination rates and assume that covers every place, all the time. There are areas where vaccination rates are much lower. There are groups that have much lower vaccination rates, as with the Eagle Mountain International Church in Texas. That’s why you’re seeing this as localized outbreaks, rather than spread out over the whole country.

The damage to that child from being raised by her batshit insane mother is going to do her more harm than any potential side effects of vaccinations. It’s a shame the father didn’t sue for custody, but I guess I don’t blame him for wanting to sever ties with that nutjob.

The sad thing is, naturopathic remedies are perfectly fine as long as you’re not using them as the antithesis of science and medicine. It’s like saying you can’t go to your doctor and also get a massage for your back pain. I don’t understand why people feel the need to make it about one or the other.

Of course it’s a gender issue. I’m curious about the fathers of these children. Do they agree with the nutjob mothers that refusing their children access to basic health care is the right thing to do? Or are they like the father in this article, who is concerned about the well-being of his child but just doesn’t have the energy to argue with the mothers? In which case, why does the mother’s preferences trump the father’s? Seems a little irresponsible to just walk away from a divorce and leave your poor kids with a batshit insane mother that you couldn’t even live with.

And quite frankly, if your child has a KNOWN allergy to metals, it’s kind of your own goddamned responsibility to inform the school and make sure your child isn’t injected with anything containing things she’s allergic to. That’s like crusading against school lunches because your kid’s nut allergy acted up when she ate a brownie from the cafeteria.

I see reading comprehension is not one your strengths. Let us try it this way. People who are working against ebola are coming down with the disease despite wearing a highly sophisticated anti-viral suit. Now from your logic it is the suit’s fault that people are getting sick and all the suits should be stopped because they cause the disease. Which is laughable because the vast majority are using the suits just fine.

But here is the truth you fail to see – people mess things up. They don’t follow what they’re supposed to do. They don’t finish their antibiotics on schedule, they don’t decontaminate for long enough after dealing with ebola patients, they don’t / won’t cover their recent vaccinations.

Chris Kid and Mike Stevens – you know and I know that a retrospective study comparing vaccinated and unvaccinated could easily be done as there are many thousands of unvaccinated children out there: The unethical rant is outdated when pro Pharma advocates try to explain why the gold standard – double blind placebo trials are not done. The real reason is they know what they will find – healthier children. Homefirst practice has 35,000 never vaccinated children and not one case of autism in his practice. The day they do an independent retrospective study the argument will be over – until then there is no science period. By the way the sort of study we parents want is one that compares health outcomes in all areas not just vaccine effectiveness.

Judith, you know very well that trying to do a retrospective study using unvaccinated children is methodologically impossible.
The prerequisite for comparative studies is that the 2 groups being compared are identical in every respect except for the intervention being planned. But of course, unvaccinated kids differ in numerous ways from vaccinated kids for a variety of reasons. They are a self selected group and these confounding variables lead to significant selection bias, invalidating appropriate comparison of the outcomes in the two groups.
People have tried to do similar small studies like this before – the stats are complex as they cannot even out differences between the groups, and rightly the results of the studies have been questioned for their accuracy.

Homefirst has “35,000 never vaccinated kids and only one case of autism”?
Where can I read about this startling finding in the medical literature?
Such an important and relevant finding would have been published, for the good of mankind of course. It would be criminal not to tell fellow doctors and scientists about this.
Where can I find the paper?

Information obtained under the ‘Freedom of Information Act’ from the MHRA of the Department of Health who collect the Yellow Card reports (equivalent of the VAERS reports). Over 18000 adverse reactions reported.

Yes, you can also get direct records from the US Vaccine Court and see how many claims were filed and the rewards that were given. Also there is a self-reporting CDC database where doctors can report adverse reactions to vaccines. As I state vaccines are about risk management. Your child could have an adverse reaction, but the odds are vastly against it. 18,000 over how many years? A number is worthless without a unit of time by the way. Measles will KILL a couple for every thousand infections. You do the math, if you can.

The growing anti science movement can’t handle complexity and lack the judgement to know which elites to trust. They are at the extreme (and slightly crazy) end of the unease we all feel as we’e lost control over and knowledge of the origins of many consumables, food especially. Yes everything is a chemical and they are laughable twits, and the more we revile them, the more they’ll dig in – certain that we’ve all be co-opted by unseen, malevolent, corporatist forces. It’s a kind of survivalist strategy – nutty, isolationist, overly simplistic, yes elitist in it’s own nutty way and it endangers all of us. We should do less harsh judging of these misguided souls, and more outreach to encourage them to re-engage politically and socially in more constructive ways. Yes our institutions and systems (like science) are imperfect but instead of rejecting them in favour of plain misinformed nonsense we should all work to make them more accountable, less mysterious, and just plain better

“She has surrounded herself with a cocoon of parents who also avoid vaccines.”

Well that’s part of the problem then, isn’t it? Society has by and large separated into factions to a degree never possible before – it’s possible to spend a considerable amount of time interacting with others and never hearing a contrary opinion or piece of information, whether legitimate or not.

A basic understanding of science and a reasonably logical approach to reality are essential – can anyone actually justify the assertion that drug companies would purposefully, and with the complicity of government (tacit or otherwise) create a situation where *more* people would need health care through poisoning or causing other disorders? It makes no sense on the face of it. Health care costs money, scarcity due to over-use creates discontent and gets governments tossed from office.The conspiracy theory is ridiculous to anyone who actually understands how government and health care work.

As someone who worked in a developing country and watched mothers who walked for days to line up at the city health center to get life-saving vaccines for their children because 1 and 8 children die of preventable diseases before the age of 5, I want to punch every anti-vaxxer in the face and tell them to check their privilege. Those same mothers I saw lining up sometimes would be turned away that day, so they would sleep on the concrete in front of the clinic so they would be first in line the next day. All for medicine that pompous, misinformed elitist twits turn their nose up at. Makes me sick.

Not sure if i should be writting this here…my daughter has received every vaccine that was necessary and never gotten sick until Gardasil…its been 5 years and she is still sick. For those who have never had a child sick because of a vaccine you cannot understand so….

I have twins. When they were born one had his eyes wide open looking at doctors and nurses, looking around the room, not crying at all. He was one super healthy baby. Doctor said jokingly I’ll take this one with me home. 17 years later they are both learning disabled and on autistic spectrum. As vaccinations progressed their autism progressed culminating with the last cocktail of vaccines when they were 15. Five month after the last shot of vaccines my son failed all subjects at high school, from 70-80% down to 20%. He acted like a zombie, fog-brained, incapable of taking care of himself. It was like a cumulative effect: more vaccinations more autism throughout the years. I went to a psychologist and he said not enough for diagnosis i.e. he is inside 25-75% curve i.e. average in psycho-educational testing. Only if you are totally autistic you get learning disability diagnosis. If I could go back in time I would never had given a single vaccine to my sons. I would had moved to a country where is is not obligatory.

It’s all very well and fine for these parents to hold their particular beliefs, but to foist this brainwashing onto vulnerable children – just to make themselves feel better – is the height of selfishness and ignorance. These people are too full of themselves for their own sanctimonious good.

Actually the school was educated about the allergy and so were the public health nurses. So please shut the hell up as you CLEARLY don’t know anything about the situation because if you did then you would know the your argument is not a valid one. Also many people aren’t aware of the allergy until after the fact. So please in the future do your own “goddamned” research before you open you speak.

You commented on the parents responsibility to inform the school ,your exact words being ” if your child has a KNOWN allergy to metals, it’s kind of your own goddamned responsibility to inform the school and make sure your child isn’t injected with anything containing things she’s allergic to.” The schools are in fact aware of such allergies as are the public health nurses that provide the young girls getting vaccinated with the vaccines. Mayo Clinic posted a COMPLETE list with ALL ingredients on their website AFTER cases of adverse reactions started occurring, not all the ingredients were originally included so please enlighten me as to how the parents were supposed to know of the harmful ingredients?? You are making assumptions that the parents are to blame when they weren’t given a full list of ingredients the vaccine contained. So what I am trying to say is that clearly you opened your mouth without doing your research as your argument is not valid one bit. So YES in fact I do have a sound argument whereas you do not.

What’s the trouble? So upset by a woman who doesn’t bow down to your superior intelligence that you have to follow me all over the internet just to prove your point? Seriously, posts from 2 months ago? Is it ego with your, or just pomposity?

Yaa, that is nothing but a bunch of complete bullcrap Tock, and you know it. Vaccines are so loaded with chemicals and contamination in those 49 doses of 14 to 16 vaccines before the age of 6, and a good share of them before the age of 2, that it is lucky we have any children left with any form of health intact. You are nothing but a vaccine shill failure on every article you post on. You just refuse to look in the mirror and face it. Where is YOUR SCIENCE to back up any of your your claims? It does NOT exist. It has never existed and never will; because the truth is obvious. The CDC knows what they are doing, and as to all the ahrm they are doing to infants and children; but there is no turning back at this point, as they and all of big pharma have everyhng to lose. It is like a freight train with no brakes going down a slope; once it was rolling it can never could and nor can be turned back.

THIS is NOT good news, and what do we hear from the CDC? Nothing. We now will never on planet earth be rid of the circulating cancer causing SV40 in humans. Thanks to the early polio vaccine, developed in the green monkey.

1 Department of Morphology and Embryology, Section of Cell Biology and Molecular Genetics, School of Medicine, and Center of Biotechnology, University of Ferrara, Via Fossato di Mortara, 64/B. 44100 Ferrara, Italy

A source of human exposure to SV40 occurred between 1955 and 1963, when inactivated and live anti-polio vaccines, prepared from polioviruses grown in naturally SV40-infected simian cell cultures, were administered to hundreds of millions of people in the United States, Canada, Europe, Asia and Africa [63]. Soon it was shown that children vaccinated with contaminated oral polio vaccines (OPV) shed infectious SV40 in stools for at least 5 weeks after vaccination [64]. However, some children, who received the same OPV, did not develop neutralizing antibodies even though they may have received large doses of live SV40, compared with the potentially inactivated SV40 in inactivated polio vaccine (IPV). Further, SV40 human contamination occurred in experimental infection with live respiratory syncytial virus to adult volunteers and a neutralizing antibody response in about two thirds of the volunteers was shown [65]. Inactivated vaccines against adenoviruses [66] and hepatitis A [67] virus also exposed humans to SV40, although the amount of infectious SV40 was almost certainly lower then that administered with OPV or live respiratory syncytial virus.

Additional serologic studies reported a SV40 seropositivity in individuals with no history of immunization with contaminated IPV or other possible route of SV40 infection [69-72]. Shah et al., [72]

These studies suggest that humans may become infected by SV40 independently from poliovirus vaccine exposure. However, most of these early serologic studies were carried out before the discovery of the two human polyomaviruses, BK and JC, which are close related to SV40 and are ubiquitous in human populations. It is possible that the early serologic evidence of SV40 antibody detection in human sera represents some degree of cross reactivity with antibodies against the highly related BK and JC viruses [73-75].

To date, the prevalence of SV40 infections in humans is not known. Recent studies, based on PCR and serological techniques, indicate that SV40 infection occurs both in children and adults. (i) SV40 DNA sequences have been detected in normal and neoplastic tissues of people either too young (1 to 30 years) or too old (60 to 85 years) to have been vaccinated with SV40-contaminated anti-polio vaccines [19,33,76-81]. This finding may also explain the lack of difference in cancer incidence between individuals vaccinated with SV40-contaminated and SV40-free anti-polio vaccines [82]. (ii) SV40 sequences and Tag were detected in blood and sperm specimens from normal individuals and oncologic patients [80,81,83-88] and in lymphoblastoid cells [32]. These results suggest that (peripheral blood mononuclear cells) PBMCs, could be a reservoir and vehicle of SV40 spreading in the tissues of the host and among the individuals. (iii) SV40 sequences were found in urine and stoole samples, from children and adults [84,89,90], indicating that the haematic, sexual and orofecal routes of transmission are likely to be responsible for SV40 horizontal infection in humans.

1 Department of Morphology and Embryology, Section of Cell Biology and Molecular Genetics, School of Medicine, and Center of Biotechnology, University of Ferrara, Via Fossato di Mortara, 64/B. 44100 Ferrara, Italy

A source of human exposure to SV40 occurred between 1955 and 1963, when inactivated and live anti-polio vaccines, prepared from polioviruses grown in naturally SV40-infected simian cell cultures, were administered to hundreds of millions of people in the United States, Canada, Europe, Asia and Africa [63]. Soon it was shown that children vaccinated with contaminated oral polio vaccines (OPV) shed infectious SV40 in stools for at least 5 weeks after vaccination [64]. However, some children, who received the same OPV, did not develop neutralizing antibodies even though they may have received large doses of live SV40, compared with the potentially inactivated SV40 in inactivated polio vaccine (IPV). Further, SV40 human contamination occurred in experimental infection with live respiratory syncytial virus to adult volunteers and a neutralizing antibody response in about two thirds of the volunteers was shown [65]. Inactivated vaccines against adenoviruses [66] and hepatitis A [67] virus also exposed humans to SV40, although the amount of infectious SV40 was almost certainly lower then that administered with OPV or live respiratory syncytial virus.

Additional serologic studies reported a SV40 seropositivity in individuals with no history of immunization with contaminated IPV or other possible route of SV40 infection [69-72]. Shah et al., [72]

These studies suggest that humans may become infected by SV40 independently from poliovirus vaccine exposure. However, most of these early serologic studies were carried out before the discovery of the two human polyomaviruses, BK and JC, which are close related to SV40 and are ubiquitous in human populations. It is possible that the early serologic evidence of SV40 antibody detection in human sera represents some degree of cross reactivity with antibodies against the highly related BK and JC viruses [73-75].

To date, the prevalence of SV40 infections in humans is not known. Recent studies, based on PCR and serological techniques, indicate that SV40 infection occurs both in children and adults. (i) SV40 DNA sequences have been detected in normal and neoplastic tissues of people either too young (1 to 30 years) or too old (60 to 85 years) to have been vaccinated with SV40-contaminated anti-polio vaccines [19,33,76-81]. This finding may also explain the lack of difference in cancer incidence between individuals vaccinated with SV40-contaminated and SV40-free anti-polio vaccines [82]. (ii) SV40 sequences and Tag were detected in blood and sperm specimens from normal individuals and oncologic patients [80,81,83-88] and in lymphoblastoid cells [32]. These results suggest that (peripheral blood mononuclear cells) PBMCs, could be a reservoir and vehicle of SV40 spreading in the tissues of the host and among the individuals. (iii) SV40 sequences were found in urine and stoole samples, from children and adults [84,89,90], indicating that the haematic, sexual and orofecal routes of transmission are likely to be responsible for SV40 horizontal infection in humans.

Tolerance Lost Vol 1/3 – 1 of 16 – Moulden (6 hrs of video) This at one time was all in a 2 DVD set which Dr Moulden had available. Best vaccine truth information available anywhere.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RZXM-TKvLN8

@lowellhubbs:disqus, I’ve been waiting some time for an answer to this. Given that you have certain, shall we say, image problems for someone aspiring to be a celebrity of the stature of some sort of antivaccine David Hasselhoff, I would think that public demonstrations of frank cowardice aren’t the brightest idea.

Vaccines are so loaded with chemicals and contamination in those 49 doses of 14 to 16 vaccines before the age of 6, and a good share of them before the age of 2, that it is lucky we have any children left with any form of health intact.

@lowellhubbs:disqus, could you pick up a copy of this for me when you have a spare moment? Or do I have to ask @lindatock:disqus? I suppose it would be indelicate to ask whether there had been any “incidents” miscarriages of justice limiting your library access.

The truth is that the known outbreaks are clearly not caused by lack of vaccination. The truth is that both the pertussis and the measles vaccines have become a failure. The CDC is never ever going to admit to the failure and nor the obvious harm done, by any vaccine. 80 to 90% failure rate for pertussis and measles vaccines in those fully vaccinated, which largely comprises the majority of the cases within the known outbreaks listed here.

Your study is worthless; and I have no idea what you are talking about. I have had nothing limited. I suggest that you discontinue wasting my time and in my even bothering to read your continued insanity.

Are you able to come up with anything resembling a reason why, Lodwill?

and I have no idea what you are talking about.

Oh, OK, scratch the foregoing.

I have had nothing limited.

Would you prefer the practical or the existential problem to be addressed first?

I suggest that you discontinue wasting my time and in my even bothering to read your continued insanity.

Um, Lodwill, it’s not my responsibility to “discontinue” your “even bothering to read” my “continued insanity.” Then again, this sort of failure to understand seems to have been an essential characteristic of a great swathe of your adult life.

Yeah, only about 1 in twenty of them will have some more serious sequelae. That’s discounting the high fever, pain, cough, and general misery of measles itself. See, I’m not really okay with setting up small children to suffer like that. Especially not for some fairy tale like ‘nature’ or ‘purity’. And definitely not for a wild fantasy like ‘toxins’. I’m kind of soft like that. Babies in pain bother me. I guess you and I are indeed different.

babies shouldn’t get the measles and i’ve yet to hear of children being in serious pain over them.
and a robust immune system is not to be sneezed at. it’s not a fairy [should be folk tale really and those all have seriously important meanings, not the disney versions, though it’s telling that those come from the land of a pill for every ill, let’s avoid pain and telling that the contents of the tales has been changed for fluff mixed with serious ,nonsensical,nastiness]tale.

A robust immune system is not to be sneezed at (pun intended, I assume), but it really has nothing to do with this. ‘I’ve yet to hear of…’ is hardly good science, nor a valid sample, but it seems to figure into so much of antivaccine decision-making, as if you experience is or should be considered universal. You live in a time and place where one of the most contagious diseases on earth is almost nonexistent, thanks to long-term prevention by vaccination.
Since I see that you misinterpreted my post, let’s clear it up. I didn’t say anything about immune systems, robust or otherwise. The fairy tale, or pure fantasy if you will, I was referring to is the idea, so often promulgated by AVers, that ‘natural’ is somehow protective or that ‘nature’ is benign, the idea that disease, disability, and death are not part and parcel of a ‘natural’ lifestyle.
You are right, though, that babies shouldn’t get the measles. So why are you doing everything in your power to create a situation where that is much more likely to happen?

Nature is not a chemical factory. There is a difference, and if you want to claim to the of need peer reviewed studies in and for that realization; you are an even bigger clueless idiot Tock, than you were before. Being a chemist does not provide for any real understanding of the physiological processes of the human body. Wake up.

Anything that shows you the truth, you immediately consider as only a conspiracy theory; and that in your big pharma brainwashed sheeple ignornace, instead of actually facing and addressing directly the truth of these issues.

The human body does not physiologically operate as, and is not the same thing as a man made corporate chemical manufacturing facility; in and as to what it produces. Nor does the human body operate physiologically the same way as a corporate big pharma pharmaceuticals manufacturing facility; and in and as to what it produces. If you are that ignorant in and as to believeing that they are one and the same, or nearly so; then you need to go back to your Shilliversity and tell them that their, and your learned and mindlessly idiotic claims have failed.

But you still refuse to understand that chemical manufacturing plant made formaldehyde is not the same exact substance as the small amounts of formaldehyde formed in the human body through metabolism. The formaldehyde issue in vaccines and in my view, is one of the least of the problematic issues regarding the vaccine ingredients and known contamination. But you know, Tock; when you have failed and can not address any of the other issues, you go right back to the worthless and a waste of time arguing about formaldehyde.

Just like and similar to in that you refuse to accept the reality of vaccine contamination, and in that there is no vaccine that can ever be actually purified, nor guaranteed as purified; considering as well all the vile and disgusting things vaccines are made from. That should be just common sense to you; but no evidence is ever enough and nothing will ever be enough for you. You must deny it all.

Todays so called big pharma modern medicine and vaccines, are nothing but one the biggest for profit and quackery filled scams in history. They have followed that path for the past one hundred years, and it will yet get much worse, and not better.

Your claims literally fall flat on their face in regard to the unvaccinated creating a risk to the vaccinated; for to start with one simple reason. If the vaccines WORKED, there would be no risk from the unvaccinated. the concept of acquiring vaccine derived herd immunity, is a myth: and it clearly has no basis in fact.

Lot of words to repeat your original claim. Would you like to try answering the question this time?
Preferably without the ridiculous attempt at insults.
How do ‘natural’ chemicals differ from the same chemical molecules put together in a lab?

‘Small amounts in the human body’ – between 50 and 55 grams are formed in the human body over the course of a day; a vaccine contains, at most 200 micrograms.

Formaldehyde is formaldehyde is formaldehyde. Doesn’t matter where it’s produced – it’s the same exact chemical, with the same exact name, the same exact formula and the same exact physicochemical properties.

Formaldehyde is CH2O. How does the CH2O produced naturally differ from CH2O produced in a lab?

It’s interesting how you will go into your usual alcoholic rant and never answer the question. It’s likely because you don’t have an answer since formaldehyde is formaldehyde and there is literally no difference between lab produced and biologically produced. The formaldehyde in the beer you drink from morning till night is the same chemical.

With all the talk on vaccinations that is going on right now, I’d be interested in talking with many of you individually about your thoughts and opinions on vaccines, especially the HPV Vaccine. If you’d like to talk to me, please contact me at katelin.albert@mail.utoronto.ca me and we can set up an time to chat. My dissertation research is specifically on the HPV vaccine and Ontario parent’s decision making. Confidentiality and anonymity will be strictly maintained.

So we live in a world were deniers of tested and empirically proven science facts are tolerated and listened to as if their anecdotes are valuable proof while skeptics of so called consensus science are constantly vilified and actually shut out of the debate. These vaccine deniers are putting more people at risk now ,not 200 years from now when the seas are supposed to rise and what a few atolls in the pacific may have to be evacuated. Talk about misplaced concern

Maybe they were autistic to begin with and the only coincidence with the timing of the vaccines was that they got older and the their brains happened to continue developing. Where is the connection between the vaccine and the autism? Sometimes there is no direct cause and effect…no matter how much we search for the answer and that one culprit that we want to point the blame at. I’m sorry to hear that your children are on the autistic spectrum…but it might well be genetic if both are the same way. And its not your fault. Its probably not the vaccine’s fault as well.

Is this an absolute joke? I can understand an educated and informed opinion about the problems of mass vaccinations and vaccines in general, sure, but to equate homeopaths, reiki, and other forms of debunked, failed, and thoroughly failed scientific theories as an alternative to established and proved methods and treatments is not just mad and complete utter bollocks, but dangerous.

Homeopathic medicines are nothing more than expensive sugar pills based on theories that fly in the face of thousands of years of the most basic and fundamental understandings of how the physical world works. It makes absolutely no sense. Spend even a fraction of a second reviewing the theory behind homeopathy and you’ll notice something insane, that the more diluted an ingredient is the more powerful it becomes, and that two similar symptoms/effects cancel each other out. It’s as if science was made up by a mad eight-year old tasked to invent a magical world of cures.

What you’ve done in this article is to give credence to a thoroughly mentally bankrupted idea. What’s your next article going to be, how the Four Humours of the Medieval world aren’t so crazy after all? That we should be praying away our diseases? Or maybe that there might just be something to sticking tiny little pins all over our bodies? Mental. Fucking mental.

56 out of 7.8 million sounds great unless your kid is the one that gets sick. Every time I read about this I keep wondering why there cannot be a medical alternative. Why we cannot have the option of a vaccine without aluminum for example? We could take a supplement to boost the immune system if necessary. Also why increase the number of required vaccinations? Why not just stick to vaccines for the really nasty diseases, like rubella, measles, tetanus, polio? Finally why is there no talk of getting the number of adverse reactions down to 0?